105 EEJ 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 English Education Journal http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej Classroom Interaction in the Teaching of English at a Private High School in Indonesia Siti Mukaromah, Henrikus Joko Yulianto Universitas Negeri Semarang Article Info ________________ Article History: Accepted 20 September 2022 Approved 11 January 2023 Published 15 March 2023 ________________ Keywords: Classroom interaction, teacher talk, student talk, silence, teaching English ____________________ Abstract ___________________________________________________________________ This study aimed to analyze the indirect and direct talk, response and initiation, and silence of teacher and student interaction in the teaching of English. This research employed an exploratory mixed method. The subject of this study was the English teacher and twenty-seven students of an English class of eleven grade in Madrasah Aliyah Futuhiyyah-2 Mranggen. The data was collected using observation, interviews, and questionnaires. The talk was analyzed using Flanders's theory (1965), modified by (Amatari, 2015; Sharma & Tiwari, 2021). The result of this study showed that the average value of activities carried out by teachers during learning is 62.44%. The average score of student activity was 29.16%. The total value of teacher and student activities is 91.6%. The value of silence is 8.33%. The percentage of teacher and students talking in the classroom interaction indicates a high tendency to accept feelings and praise or encouragement, lecturing, and responses. The indirect and direct talk implemented in classroom interactions showed that indirect 41,62% was higher than direct talk 20,82%. The response and initiation showed that the students pay attention well to the teacher and sometimes give initiation. The domineering talk caused silence showed that the use of silence was low. Viewed from the number of average scores produced by teacher of 62.44% and student talk of 29.16%, it can be concluded that the percentage of teachers talk is higher than students. This research could help teachers to evaluate their teaching activities. Additionally, for students, the findings of this study can increase participation using the initiation category.  Correspondence Address : Kampus Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Semarang, Jl Kelud Utara 3, Semarang, 50233 E mail: sitimukaromah741@gmail.com p-ISSN 2087-0108 e-ISSN 2502-4566 Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 106 INTRODUCTION The problem of interaction between teachers and students in the classroom during the teaching and learning still needs to be observed to achieve a teaching system that interests students; so that students feel more comfortable learning in class with their teacher. The students should be continuously encouraged to participate in learning activities to enhance the classroom climate and to encourage students to continue learning. The views and concerns of the teacher are significant in shaping the learning activities based on the pedagogical underpinnings (Nasrullah et al., 2021). The teachers have significant influence over the students. And the student's behavior is significantly influenced by the teacher's behavior. Interaction is more than action followed by reaction (Nashruddin & Ningtyas, 2020). It means that interaction is an action that provides a response or reaction or means of communication that involves more than one person. Interaction in the classroom occurs during the teaching and learning process. Teachers and students take turns through verbal communication in classroom interaction. The classroom climate enhances positive interaction among students and between students and teachers. A sample of items measuring classroom climate is managing learning activities by teachers to respond to individual learning needs, encouraging students to participate in learning activities, and supporting students to achieve their learning (Juuti et al., 2020; Sriklaub et al., 2015). The problem of this research stems from the matter teacher face in teaching English where the teacher is struggling to attract students' attention. The technique teachers interact with and talk to students can affect students' interest in learning English. Therefore, there is a need for good interaction between teacher and students in the teaching-learning process to make the students not noisy, pay attention, and feel more comfortable learning in class. The existence of good interaction between teachers and students in the teaching of English makes learning objectives easier to achieve. Therefore, knowledge about building a good relationship between teachers and students in the classroom is urgent because classroom interaction plays a principal role in accepting and absorbing the target language in the class. Successful learning is affected by interaction in the classroom because the classroom is a place for students to develop the knowledge and skills required for spontaneous communication in the target language (Fitriati & Lisa, 2019). Classroom interaction is the interconnection between teacher and students during lectures by exchanging ideas, thoughts, and feelings during learning activities. The relationship between teachers and students in the school will influence the teaching-learning process (Claessens et al., 2017; Syahabuddin et al., 2020). Classroom interaction analysis related to teachers' self-efficacy in managing the classroom positively. Enjoyment of learning has empirically related to learning behaviors, such as self- regulated learning, problem-solving, and learning from mistakes. Teacher self-efficacy in classroom management enhances classroom management and positive teacher-student interactions. The student-teacher attitudes toward classroom participation were variably associated with their diversity, and the reasons for the attitudes were mediated internally and externally. Focusing on student-teacher participation during teaching and learning is crucial as it will enable them to promote classroom interaction among pupils in their future teaching undertakings. Equality in classroom participation creates a learning environment whereby all students thrive jointly for the best end, regardless of their diversity (Hettinger, et al., 2021; Rugambuka & Mazzuki, 2023). Classroom interaction analysis has a facilitative effect on learning the target form. Classroom interaction may trigger the learner to see the target form and have a positive impact on learning the language. Organizing simple and easy-to-understand discourses during the teaching and learning process is an essential component of teaching a foreign language, and teacher talks not only determine how well they Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 107 present their topic but also ensure that students learn effectively. Since language students in a classroom can use the target language for a variety of different purposes, including talking to the teacher and other students, one way to understand students' language is to look at how they use it to communicate during lessons, which has a big impact on how their language skills develop (Ismail et al., 2022; Tiwari, 2021). Furthermore, using classroom discourse analysis can be an alternative way especially to examine student-teacher interaction during the learning process. Although each teacher was given the same unit to teach, they differed in their verbal explanations. They use different dialogic strategies, discussion patterns, and interactions with students. In the transformation of the education system, Interaction Analysis has a lot of benefits. As a system for evaluating verbal activity in the classroom, it provides a tool for students, prospective teachers, and managers to provide comprehensive information on teaching actions relevant to educational enhancement (Sharma & Tiwari, 2021). The quality and quantity of teacher-student interaction are critical dimensions of effective classroom teaching. Interaction analysis is a technique for capturing quantitative and qualitative teacher verbal behavior that is directly related to the social-emotional climate of the classroom. Ned Flanders (1965) expanded and designed it out of Social Psychological Theory to test the effect of the social-emotional atmosphere on students' attitudes and learning. The theoretical assumptions of Interaction Analysis (IA) are that in a classroom situation, verbal communication is predominant; the teacher exerts a great deal of influence on the students, and the student's behavior is affected to a great extent by this type of teacher behavior exhibited. Flanders Interaction Analysis Categories (FIAC) is a ten-category system of communication that attempts to categorize all the verbal behavior in the classroom. Seven categories are used when the teacher is talking (teacher talk), two when the students are giving responses and initiating (student talk), and the tenth category is silence or confusion (Amatari, 2015). Category 1 through 4 represents indirect influence, and categories 5, 6, and 7 have direct influence. Indirect influence encourages participation by the student and increases his freedom of action. Direct influence intensifies the active control of the teacher and often stimulates compliance. The division of student talk into categories 8 and 9 provides an automatic check on the freedom of student activities within the system of categories. Initiation of student talk can indicate the spontaneous expression of ideas. The purpose category 8 and 9 is to analyze teacher influence. Category 10 is silence. By extending their silent pause, teachers allow learners increased space for cognitive processing (Flanders, 1965; King, 2013). Interaction is one of the primaries between teachers and students in classrooms. The pattern that occurred in the classroom interaction in some research was dominant in indirect talk and in others dominant in direct talk (Hasanat et al., 2017; Khusnaini, 2019; Rahmawati et al., 2021). Teacher talk is necessary to organize and manage the classroom. The classroom interaction arose through the teacher talk when explaining the material, giving questions, giving motivation, and giving an opportunity to responses the material that the teacher delivered during the teaching-learning process. In interpersonal exchanges, the English teachers performed their competence by performing a greeting, leave- taking, introducing someone, expressing gratitude, giving a compliment, and reacting to students' speech (Asbah & Rajiman, 2015; Boyd, 2016). By using oral language the teacher and learners can exchange knowledge, feelings, and attitudes, and maintain social relationships. From the teacher's point of view 'talk' is a valuable tool in gaining the teacher to investigate the learning environment itself. Humanities teachers encouraged students more than those in mathematics and empirical sciences (Mahmoodi, 2016; Sagita, 2018). On the contrary, direct talk indicates that the teacher controlled and provided the students with directions, commands, or orders in the learning process. Generally, the students received well the teacher’s talks in the classroom Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 108 interaction, but the un-conducive atmosphere could be decreased if the teacher used more lectures and gave directions category with various drills by using games or ice breaking, so the teacher could get more attention to the learning process to become fun. Giving direction dominates the teacher talk category consisting of the direct influence of teacher talk as the most applied interaction by the teacher. The teacher used giving direction as the higher category. Teacher-centered was still dominant, it was proven from the most dominant category of teacher talks which was giving directions, and the lowest frequency was accepting or using ideas of students (Nasir et al., 2019); Rahmawati et al., (2021). In didactic literature, there are mainly two teaching models: Direct teaching with a focused focus on quick achievement of the knowledge of the facts, the rules, and the formation of skills for them, while the content of the subject is divided into small steps that are easily adopted. In direct teaching, the objective is to involve students in scrutiny and investigation, which helps shape and develop concepts in the form of patterns and abstracts. The teacher in these situations has the role of facilitator and moderator, who coordinates and organizes the learning process in interaction with the students (Gaxhiqi, 2020). Student talk shapes the type, scope, and quality of learning. Studies on the student talk focus on students' responses, enthusiasm, and interest in teaching conducted by Khoza & Msimanga, 2021; Zuo & Walsh, 2021. Terms of students’ responses are classified into active response in pure English, in mixed English- Indonesia, in pure Indonesia, and passive response in keeping silent (Anisah et al., 2019). The content of the interaction aspect is concerned with the contents addressed by utterances of students and teachers concerning the lesson being taught. The students need to learn which words are essential in each subject, which words are used across subjects, and the distinctions between scientific and everyday concepts. Learning to see the nuances in a word and determine which meaning is relevant in a specific context is central to mastering an academic discourse. Mastering academic language involves both appropriating subject-specific concepts and developing the ability to express subject-specific content in ways that demonstrate subject-specific knowledge, such as by reasoning and justification. It is clear that as learners and a teacher interact, they learn from each other, thus reinforcing the social relationship between themselves (Dube et al., 2021; Rødnes et al., 2021; Worku & Alemu, 2021). A few students are not so well in their abilities to perform because of their unsound relationship with their teacher. Teacher-student interaction in the classroom has a deep effect on student's learning skills. The teacher is generally the one who initiates the talk, and he decides on the follow-up of the talk by making use of pre- allocation of the turns. Besides, students also make up part of this right by self-nominating themselves to talk. In many countries, critical thinking is deemed an important goal of education, including higher education and citizenship education. Critical thinking is often closely associated with metacognition or described as a metacognitive process as it is believed that students who can monitor and evaluate their thought processes are more likely to demonstrate high-quality thinking that increases the chances of producing a logical conclusion to an argument or solution to a problem. In sum, critical thinking is operationalized as the skills of analysis, comparison, evaluation, inference, and synthesis. (Ajmal, et al., 2022; Cui & Teo, 2023; Sotelo & Wilches, 2021). There will be times when no student can respond to a teacher's inquiry. Regularly students don't answer regardless of whether they comprehend the inquiry, know the appropriate response, and can deliver the appropriate response. At the point when the teacher posed inquiries to assess their understanding, they liked to stay quiet and lethargic. The silent students have a low level of participation. Students' cognitive engagement and influence among their peers reinforced participation in classroom talk. The classroom-level classrooms with more dialogic instruction where students engaged more Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 109 in classroom talk had better learning results than classrooms in which the teacher did most of the talking. This implies that the effects of classroom talk among individual students in the class would vary depending on their level of participation. The distribution of opportunities to engage in classroom talk among individual students because it is possible that the more an individual student participates in classroom discussion, the more advantaged they become. They interacted mainly with the teacher and engaged by responding to the teacher's questions. The students with high levels of cognitive and motivational-affective attributes participated in class significantly more often than other students with low levels of cognitive and motivational- affective attributes (Leela, & Yoghita, 2021; Sedlacek & Seďova, 2020). The students seemed reluctant to talk about their ideas because their answers might be incorrect. Longer wait time after a teacher question resulted in lengthier and more linguistically complex student responses, increased talk time, and more student-initiated questions. When teachers provided extended wait time, students were able to produce lengthier responses with more complicated linguistic structures involving verbs. They also talked more and initiated more questions themselves. The use of wait time signals to students that their ideas and contributions are valued, creating a supportive and inclusive classroom environment that encourages student participation and learning. By giving students the necessary time and space to articulate their thoughts, wait time enhances their language development and communication skills, enabling them to express scientific concepts more effectively (An & Childs, 2023; Lai, 2022; Sum & Kwon, 2020). Several previous studies explore the characteristics of teaching English to secondary school students. It consists of strategies and motivation. Teaching English at the secondary level needs effective techniques such as teaching techniques through microblogging activities to promote talk for learning in the classroom (Amundrud et al., 2022). The use of microblogging tools in the classroom created a collaborative and dialogic space where students could actively engage in discussions, share ideas, and reflect on their communication practices, leading to enhanced collaborative thinking and dialogue. The other research compares strategies of the Student Teams-Achievement Division as cooperative learning (STAD CL) compared to Direct Instruction (DI). The results showed that STAD CL as a teaching strategy for teaching reading to those who had high and low learning motivation was more effective than DI because most students stated that STAD CL contributed to increasing reading performance in the classroom. The STAD technique is more effective than the GI technique (Chotimah & Rukmini, 2017); (Oktaviana & Fitriati, 2017). Other studies focus on cognitive and metacognitive strategies. There is an effective interaction between teaching techniques and reading habits to enhance students’ reading comprehension (Fitriyani et al., 2020); (Nurhidayat & Suwandi, 2021). This is consistent with Yusmalinda & Astuti, (2020), three strategies of procedure text: scaffolding and audio-visual method, grammar-translation method, and project-based learning. The finding revealed, that the most appropriate method in teaching reading comprehension was the grammar-translation method since it helps students comprehend the procedure text. Some studies also focused on motivation and reading enjoyment. Motivation is the energy that supports students in achieving their goals in learning a language and involves the biological, emotional, social, and cognitive force that active behavior (Nugroho et al., 2019). Reading motivation is one of the most important predictors of reading comprehension. Research describing an interaction among techniques, motivation, and teaching reading comprehension by Sari and Faridi, (2020) and Arifin and Faridi, (2017) indicated that students have better motivation to learn English as a Foreign Language. It could build the English classroom atmosphere and achievement much better since the application of the Cognitive Language Learning Strategy (CLLS). The most important predictors appeared to be whether the students Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 110 had been retained previously and the track. The development of teachers’ motivational strategies and techniques devoted to improving classroom practices can arouse students’ motivation toward learning English. Therefore, efforts need to be intentionally made to enforce the development of students' reading engagement, as good reading engagement may result in good academic engagement (Houtte & Demanet, 2016; Widati et al., 2023). Teachers' question is used to check the learners' comprehension, to give them opportunities to engage in classroom interaction and to elicit the students' schemata about today's lesson. In the classroom, teachers can use both types of questions to help learners understand the lesson and develop their oral fluency The use of embodied actions along with teacher talk can be considered to have significant roles that promote and mediate learning opportunities (Saswati, 2022; Sugianto & Yusuf, 2023). The study of the types of teacher talks in classroom interactions consists of direct and indirect influences as proposed by Flanders was done by Indriyani and Trioktawiani (2019) and Khusnaini (2019). The result showed that the indirect influence of teacher talk was more frequently used than direct. Teachers indirectly influence the students by asking questions. The teacher indirectly influenced the students by relying hard on asking questions. This interaction indicated that the teacher often relied on asking rather than lecturing the students. The teacher also realized that praise was a powerful determinant of students' behavior and provided rewards to encourage the students' performance. Realizing that teacher domination in English Foreign Language classes is not very good for improving learners’ ability to talk in the target language, teachers should manage their talk in appropriate proportions. It means that they have to make learners talk more. The teachers should involve the students during lesson delivery (Rahayu & Syahrizal, 2020; Zhao & Boonyaprakob, 2022). Given the above discussion, this study chose and is focused on Flanders's theory (1965) by modifying Flanders’s scale (Amatari, 2015; Sharma & Tiwari, 2021) because it is the most suitable and widely used technique in the field of research to determine whether a teacher uses an indirect or direct way in her approach to motivate and control students in the classroom. It is an effective way of measuring the social-emotional climate in English classrooms. It is an objective and reliable method for observation of classroom teaching. This technique can increase student participation in English learning. The classroom verbal interaction can be made more effective. The direct behavior of teachers can shift to indirect behavior, which gives students more time to express themselves orally. An important advantage of the procedure developed in this study is that it yields data on behavior, role, and learning activity in a quantified form. Flanders interaction analysis system is an important analysis method for quantitative analysis of classroom teaching. It is evident that in the previous related research, most of them used qualitative methods. Meanwhile, in this study, I used an exploratory mix method. Furthermore, the scope of the research in the previous studies only focused on one of the three categories of Flanders's theory. Yet, this study explores the three categories in Flanders's analysis; teacher talk, student talk, and silence or confusion. This study is aimed to analyze the teacher and students' talk, including indirect and direct, response and initiation, and silence in the teaching of English. This study is expected to help the teachers to evaluate their teaching performance to create a more pleasant atmosphere for learning English in the classroom. Through the application of this method, the process of teacher-student talk interaction in classroom teaching can be recorded and analyzed objectively. METHOD The objective of the study is to analyze teacher talk and student talk in classroom interaction in the teaching of English. This study applied mixed methods with the research design exploratory. It was because Flanders Interaction Analysis is a technique for catching on to the Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 111 qualitative and quantitative dimensions of a teacher’s verbal behavior. The participant of this research is an English teacher and twenty-seven students in the eleventh grade of Language class in Madrasah Aliyah Futuhiyyah-2 Mranggen for the year 2022/2023. The object of the study is classroom interaction based on Flanders (1965), consisting of teacher talk, student talk, and silence. Method of collecting data gathered from observation, interview, and questionnaire. The exploratory research design was carried out in qualitative research first for data collection. The qualitative data will gather from classroom observation and interviews. The quantitative data was collected from a questionnaire based on the Likert scale and the theory of classroom interaction based on Flanders (1965) to calculate the frequency, percentage, and ratio of teacher and student talk. The results of the exploratory mixed-method emphasize qualitative research, while the quantitative will develop exploration for generalization. Procedure of analyzing data use observation analysis based on Brown (2001) and Flanders theory (1965) by modifying Amatari (2015) and Sharma & Tiwari (2021), interview analysis, and questionnaire analysis use Likerts scale. The pattern of analyzing the interaction is presented in Table 1 as follows: Table 1. Measures for analyzing patterns of interaction Type of ratio Symbol Calculation % Teacher Talk TT 100 / total tallies *Σ (cat. 1+2+3+4+5+6+7) % Student Talk ST 100 / total tallies *Σ (cat. 8+9) % Silence or Confusion SC 100 / total tallies *Σ (cat. 10) Source: Sharma & Tiwari, (2021) RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS In this part, the result start with qualitative finding then built to quantitative finding. Classroom Interaction the Teaching of English Classroom interactions that take place in the teaching of English at the eleventh grade in the language class consist of teacher talk, student talk, and silence. There is the use of indirect and direct talk from the teacher, reponse and initiation from the students, and the use of silence during the teaching-learning activities. In indirect talk, teacher mostly used category of accepts students’ feeling and praise or encouragement. In direct talk, the teacher use category of lecturing more dominant. In student talk, the students more use category of response than initiation. In the teaching of English also found the category of silence or confusion in classroom interaction. The teacher and student interaction variables in the observation are presented in the following pie chart shape. Figure 1. Teacher and student interaction in classroom interaction The finding from the observation above is in line with the results of interview with the English teacher and students in eleven grade in the language class (Interview, 26052023). This is as stated by the English teacher in eleven grade that the teacher accepts and clarifies the tone of the feeling of the students in an unthreatening 12,5 12,5 8,33 8,33 12,54,16 4,16 20,83 8,33 8,33 Accept Feelings Praise or Encourages Accepts or uses Ideas of Students Asking Questions Lecturing Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 112 manner during the teaching-learning process. The English teacher's statement is as follows: "...yes, I accept students' feelings when teaching English. Because I feel happy when my students are happy, too." In line with the statement above, some students also emphasized that the teacher did accept and clarify the tone of the feelings of the students. Here is the following claim by students. "...we are motivated enough and feel happy when the teacher accepts our feelings during English learning." The result of the questionnaire for twenty seven students showed that the students more happy when the teacher accept students’ feeling and giving praise or encouragement. It is presented in Table 2. Table 2. The result of the students’ questionnaire No. Types Statements SA A N 1. Accepts Feeling I’m happy when the teacher ask the condition. 20 7 I motivated enough when the teacher accepts students feeling. 10 15 2 2. Praises or Encou- ragements I feel more confident when the teacher praises and encourages the students’ answers. 15 12 When the teacher praises me, I am encouraged to answer next questions. 22 5 3. Accepts or Uses Ideas of Students I need the teacher’s support when I share the opinion. 21 6 4. Asks Questions I feel anxiety when the teacher asks the question. 12 13 2 5. Lecturing I like it when the teacher gives correct information when my answer is wrong. 14 10 3 6. Give Directions I do not like it when the teacher gives me many assignments. 23 4 No. Types Statements SA A N I feel happy when the teacher gives command. 9 12 6 7. Criticizes or Justifies the Authority I feel pressure when the teacher criticizes my wrong answers. 16 10 1 *SA:Strongly Agree, A: Agree, N: Neutral (No Response for Disgaree and Strongly Disagree) The finding above was in line with the previous studies conducted by Nasir et al. (2019) and Zhao and Boonyaprakob (2022) that stated that quantity, category, and characteristics of talk are interrelated and must all be improved together to increase the quality of interaction to affect student learning outcomes. In interpersonal exchanges, the English teachers performed their competence by performing a greeting, leave- taking, introducing someone, expressing gratitude, giving a compliment, and reacting to the interlocutor's speech (Asbah & Rajiman, 2015; Colle & Fitriati, 2019). The classroom climate enhances positive interaction among students and between students and teachers. Sample of items measuring classroom climate is managing learning activities by teachers to respond to individual learning needs, encouraging students to participate in learning activities, and supporting students to achieve their learning (Sriklaub et al., 2015). The Percentages of Teacher and Student’s Talk The percentages of teacher and students talk in classroom interaction showed in table 3. The talk spend by the teacher and students in classroom interaction have different proportions. Based on the values produced by the teacher, it can be seen that the percentage of teachers lecturing in the teaching of English reaches the highest score compared to the teacher's activities in accepting students' feelings, giving praise or encouragement, accepting students' ideas, and giving questions. Table 3. The percentages of teacher and student’s talk Cate- gories Com- ponent Freq. Percent. Total Percentage Accept Feelings 3 12,5 41,62 Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 113 Cate- gories Com- ponent Freq. Percent. Total Percentage Teacher Indirect Talk Praise or Encourages 3 12,5 Accepts or uses Ideas of Students 2 8,33 Asking Questions 2 8,33 Teacher Direct Talk Lecturing 3 12,5 20,82 Giving Directions 1 4,16 Criticizing or Justifying Authority 1 4,16 Student Talk (ST) Response 5 20,83 29,16 Initiation 2 8,33 Silence Silence or Confusion 2 8,33 8,33 Table 3 shows the teacher and students interaction in the teaching of English. Based on data regarding indirect talk in classroom observation, it can be described that the proportion of category accept feeling and praise or encouragement have the largest value of 12,5 %. While the direct talk, the largest value is category of lecturing. The percentage of teacher in teaching material by 12.5%. For student talk, the largest category that used by students is category of response. This statement can be seen from the percentage of students in responding to the teacher by 20.83%. The value of silence in the teaching of English is 8.33%. This value shows that the silence created in the teaching-learning process is low. The Teacher’s Indirect and Direct Talk The result of indirect talk in classroom interaction was higher than direct talk. Overall, 64, 2 % of teacher talking time was used for indirect talk. It means that the teacher did more active in accepting feelings and praise or encouragement. The result of indirect and direct talk use can be seen in Figure 1I. Figure 2. Teacher’s indirect and direct talk The result of the direct talk showed in the average lecturing that the teacher did during the observation was 12,5%. It was the teacher who gave explanations that had a great influence to make the students' responses. The Students’ Response and Initiation The response and initiation from the students when learning English in the class described in the results of observation, interviews, and questionnaire of twenty-seven students showed the students pay attention well when the teacher gave the explanation in front of the class and sometimes they give initiation during the lesson. Besides that, students felt happy when the teacher accept students’ feelings and gave praise or encouragement. The students' response and initiation were presented in Table 4. Table 4. Summary of students talk No Students talk Frequency Percentage 1 Response 5 20,83 2 Initiation 2 8,33 Students' talk during English learning also has different proportions. This statement can be seen from the percentage of students responding to the teacher and the percentage of students in expressing their initiation. From these grades, it is known that students are more active in responding to the teacher's lecturing than giving initiation. This is in line with the results of interviews with students in eleven grade. Some students 0 10 20 30 40 50 41,62 20,82 % Teacher Indirect Talk Teacher Direct Talk Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 114 emphasized that they respond the learning activities and sometimes have initiation. Even though the initiation is not optimal. The following claim exemplifies this circumstance. "... We response well during the English learning.and motivated enough and feel happy when the teacher accepts our feelings during English learning." Silence or Confusion in Classroom Interaction Teacher’s domineering talk caused students’ silence in the classroom interaction. It was occur after the teacher criticizing or justifying authority. Sometimes confusion also occur when the students in silence condition, nobady talk. It is like a period of pause in classroom interaction. The total value of teacher and student activities is 91.6%. While the value of silence in learning the conjunction is 8.33%. This value shows that the silence created in the learning process is low. This means that teachers and students in a period of silence or short pauses situation. The percentage of silence or confusion was presented in a pie chart below. Figure 3. Result of silence in classroom interaction CONCLUSION Based on the findings, the interaction between the teacher and students in the teaching of English has fulfilled the elements of classroom interaction analysis theory, especially in Flanders theory. the students also pay attention well, they respond to the teacher, and sometimes they give initiation. However the use of lecturing is more dominant, and the use of initiation from students is still not optimal. Students only often listen to the teacher, so students are less active. Besides that, the total value of teacher and student activities is 91.6%. The average score from teacher activities is 62.44%, student activities of 29.16%, and silence is 8.33%. It concluded that in the teaching of English, the percentage of teacher talk is higher than students talk, and silence created in classroom interaction is low. This study still has limitations because of the fact that Flanders's analysis produces data on behavior, role, and learning activities in the quantitative form. Therefore, further research needs to be conducted with other designs such as the explanatory mixed method. It is enabled to explain quantitative data reinforced by qualitative data. And it is suggested to conduct research over long periods by using additional research instruments to enhance the precision of data. 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. Ajmal, M., Komal, A., & Kauser, A. (2022). Exploring the role of teacher-student interaction in English language teaching classroom. Pakistan Journal of Social Research, 04(03), 561–569. Amundrud, A., Rasmussen, I., & Warwick, P. (2022). Teaching talk for learning during co-located microblogging activities. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 34(4), 100618. Anisah, N., Fitriati, S. W., & Rukmini, D. (2019). Teachers’questioning strategies to scaffold students’ learning in reading. English Education Journal, 9(1), 128–143. An, J., & Childs, A. (2023). Teacher questions, wait time, and student output in classroom interaction in EMI science classes: An interdisciplinary view. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 13(2), 471–493. Teacher Talk 63% Students Talk 29% Silence 8% Teacher Talk Students Talk Silence Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 115 Arifin, R. A., & Faridi, A. (2017). The students’ perception and achievement of English reading comprehension. English Education Journal, 7(2), 139–148. Asbah, & Rajiman. (2015). Analysis of classroom interaction in Efl class. Linguistics and ELT Journal, 3(1), 137. Boyd, M. P. (2016). Relations between teacher questioning and student talk in one elementary ELL classroom. Journal of Literacy Research SAGE. Chotimah, N., & Rukmini, D. (2017). The effectiveness of student team achievement division (STAD) and group investigation (GI) techniques to teach reading comprehension to students with high and low motivation. English Education Journal, 7(1), 47–53. Claessens, L. C. A., van Tartwijk, J., van der Want, A. C., Pennings, H. J. M., Verloop, N., den Brok, P. J., & Wubbels, T. (2017). Positive teacher–student relationships go beyond the classroom, problematic ones stay inside. Journal of Educational Research, 110(5), 478–493. Cui, R., & Teo, P. (2023). Thinking through talk: Using dialogue to develop students’ critical thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 125, 104068. Dube, M. C., Uleanya, C., Mncube, D. W., Africa, S., & Africa, S. (2021). Student teachers’ preparedness for classroom interaction during teaching practice: University of Zululand supervisors’ perspectives. Journal of Advocacy, Research and Education, 8(3), 88–94. Fitriyani, N., Suwandi, & Sutopo, D. (2020). The effectiveness of herringbone and buzz group techniques to teach reading comprehension for students with high and low reading habits. English Education Journal (EEJ), 10(3), 331–339. Fitriati, S. W. & Lisa, A. (2019). Discourse studies in English Language Education. Unnes Press, Semarang. Flanders, N. A. (1965). Teacher influence, pupil attitudes, and achievement. In Cooperative Research Monograph No. 12 Gaxhiqi, B. (2020). Aspects and format form of interaction teacher-student during the classroom. Journal of International Cooperation and Development, 3(1), 120. Hasanat, H., Abu Omar, R. A., & Al-Jazi, S. (2017). A study of the extent and nature of classroom verbal interaction in tenth-grade, Arabic language class in Jordan ising Flanders interaction analysis category system (FIACS). International Journal of Learning and Development, 7(4), 68. Hettinger, K., Lazarides, R., Rubach, C., & Schiefele, U. (2021). Teacher classroom management self-efficacy: Longitudinal relations to perceived teaching behaviors and student enjoyment. Teaching and Teacher Education, 103, 103349. Houtte, M. Van, & Demanet, J. (2016). Teachers’ beliefs about students, and the intention of students to drop out of secondary education in Flanders. Teaching and Teacher Education. Indriyani, C. E., & Trioktawiani, F. R. (2019). Teacher talks : an analysis of direct and indirect influences for young learners in EFL class. JELE (Journal of English Language and Education), 5(2), 99–106. Ismail, N. M., Yoestara, M., & Jamilah, S. (2022). Comparing lexical density in teacher talks: Elementary school, and higher education level. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Learning, 25(1), 132–148. Juuti, K., Loukomies, A., & Lavonen, J. (2020). Interest in dialogic and non-dialogic teacher talk situations in middle school science classroom. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(8), 1531–1546. Khoza, H. C., & Msimanga, A. (2021). Understanding the nature of questioning and teacher talk moves in interactive classrooms: A case of three South African teachers. Research in Science Education, 0123456789. Khusnaini, N. (2019). The Analysis of Teacher Talk and The Characteristic of Classroom Interaction in English for Young Learner. Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 116 ELT Forum: Journal of English Language Teaching, 8(2), 166–174. King, J. (2013). Silence in the second language classroom. In Palgravemacmillan. Lai, C.-J. (2022). Teacher-student interaction for English-Medium Instruction (EMI) content and Language learning and the effects of implementing multimodal input of classroom interaction: University students’ perceptions. English Language Teaching, 16(1), 52. Leela, & Yoghita. (2021). Improving teacher- student interaction in the English classroom: An action research report. International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology, 9(VIII), 191–193. Mahmoodi, F. (2016). The effect of teacher talk style on student achievement. International Journal of Educational and Psychological Researches, 2(4), 205. Marzuki, A. G. (2019). Utilizing recorded English dialogues in teaching English word stress to Islamic higher education students in Indonesia. Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 5(1), 53–64. Nashruddin, & Ningtyas, P. (2020). English as Foreign Language (EFL) Teacher’s Questioning Strategies in Classroom Interaction. Utamax : Journal of Ultimate Research and Trends in Education, 2(1), 5–11. Nasir, C., Yusuf, Y. Q., & Wardana, A. (2019). A qualitative study of teacher talk in an EFL classroom interaction in Aceh Tengah, Indonesia. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(3), 525–535. Nasrullah, et al. (2021). Teaching English in secondary school: Approaches, methods, and techniques. Inovish Journal, 2(1), 5–11. Nugroho, T., Anggani, D., & Hartono, R. (2019). English teachers’ perception on strategies in teaching reading comprehension to motivate the tudents. English Education Journal (EEJ), 9(1), 56–61. Nurhidayat, N., & Suwandi, S. (2021). The effectiveness of Herringbone and SQ4R as techniques in teaching reading comprehension to students with visual and auditory learning styles. English Education Journal, 11(2), 56–70. Oktaviana, T., & Fitriati, W. (2017). Effectiveness of student team achievement division cooperative learning and direct instruction in teaching reading comprehension to students with different learning motivation article. EEJ, 7(2), 112–118. Rahayu, S., & Syahrizal, T. (2020). Teacher talk in young learners classroom interaction. Indonesian EFL Journal, 6(1), 89. Rahmawati, L., Evenddy, S. S., & Handayani, L. (2021). Teacher’s talks in classroom interaction at Bani Adung Islamic boarding school Banten. The Journal of English Literacy Education, 8(1), 1–14. Rødnes, K. A., Rasmussen, I., Omland, M., & Cook, V. (2021). Who has power? An investigation of how one teacher led her class towards understanding an academic concept through talking and microblogging. Teaching and Teacher Education, 98, 103229. Rugambuka, I. B., & Mazzuki, B. D. (2023). University student-teachers’ diversity and attitudes toward classroom participation. Heliyon, 9(6), e16364. Sari, F. K., Bharati, D. A. L., & Faridi, A. (2020). The effectiveness of anticipation guide and visualization strategies in teaching reading comprehension to students with high and low motivation. English Education Journal, 10(4), 603–613. Saswati, R. (2022). Teacher questioning strategies employed in speaking classes in EFL setting: A Study of classroom interaction. Scope : Journal of English Language Teaching, 07, 98–104. Sotelo, Y. S. T., & Wilches, E. A. P. (2021). Talk and pedagogy: particularities of a language classroom interaction. Ingeniería Investigación y Desarrollo, 20(2), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.19053/1900771x.v20. n2.2020.13389 Sedláček, M., & Šeďova, K. (2020). Are student engagement and peer relationships connected to student participation in Siti Mukaromah & Henrikus Joko Yulianto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 105-117 117 classroom talk?. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction (Vol. 26). Sharma, M., & Tiwari, P. N. (2021). A study of class interaction analysis using Flanders’s FIAC. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 171–179. Sriklaub, K., Wongwanich, S., & Wiratchai, N. (2015). Development of the classroom climate measurement model. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 171, 1353– 1359. Sugianto, A., & Yusuf, F. N. (2023). Teacher talk in a British Sitcom: Insights from embodied actions to classroom interaction competence. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Learning, 26(1), 92– 114. Sum, E. S. W., & Kwon, O. N. (2020). Classroom talk and the legacy of Confucian culture in mathematics classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 88, 102964. Syahabuddin, K., Fhonna, R., & Maghfirah, U. (2020). Teacher-student relationships: An influence on the English teaching-learning process. Studies in English Language and Education, 7(2), 393–406. Tiwari, T. D. (2021). Classroom Interaction in communicative language teaching of public secondary schools in Nepal. IJELTAL (Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics), 5(2), 373. Widiati, U., Sharif, T. I. S. T., Hanifiyah, L., & Nindya, M. A. (2023). Reading engagement of Indonesian secondary EFL teachers as literacy indicators perceived over reading resources and pleasure reading. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(3), 828–839. Worku, H., & Alemu, M. (2021). Supportiveness of existing classroom culture to the implementation of dialogic teaching : Analysis of teacher-student interaction in Physics teaching and learning. 6(3). Yusmalinda, A., & Astuti, P. (2020). English teachers’ methods in teaching reading comprehension of procedure text. ELT Forum: Journal of English Language Teaching, 9(1), 75–84. Zhao, K., & Boonyaprakob, K. (2022). A case study of Chinese students learning Thai as a foreign language: Flanders Interaction Analysis Category System. IJTE- International Journal of TESOL & Education, 2(1), 145–169.