Dr. Mohammad Mohammadi and Simin Nezamdoost-e Sani work with Urmia University (Urmia).
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of question-making as a post-reading activity on the development of student-teacher interaction. The subjects were 150 intermediate level language learners of Jahahad-e-Daneshgahi Language Institute chosen randomly with their age ranging between 16 and 20. The study included 4 experimental and 2 control groups with a pre-treatment and post-treatment observation of the classes. The findings of the study indicated that question-making was very effective in increasing the amount of student-teacher interaction. With the significance set at p<.05, it was observed that after the application of a two-tailed t-test, sig. =0.035, which indicated that with 95% confidence the hypothesis was accepted. The findings can be used to enable students to open up and express themselves in the classroom as a small society and later in their every day life out of the class.
From very beginning the reason behind learning any language was being able to communicate in that language. Later mankind needed even to use more than one or two languages. As English became the language used as the medium of international communication, appropriate training to learn it became essential. Despite this need, nowadays, some English teaching centers fail to develop English proficiency for communication.
The lack of interpersonal interaction in English as a foreign language (EFL) learning context seems to result in deficiency of communicative competence, because English is not used as a means of communication (Cheon, 2003).
Within 7years of teaching EFL, I realized that most students were reluctant to open up and speak in the class, even if they knew the answer to my questions or had enough information to give explanation about something.
In an action research I conducted, I realized that approximately more than 90% of the interaction was from teachers to students. I chose question-making strategy as a post-reading activity because I believed that communication meant exchanging information through asking and answering questions to fill an information gap (Freeman, 2003, p.134).
Also reading texts were applied in this research because they were learning English in the native language context and it was the only chance students had to explore and confront the language both in classes and out of classes.
Interaction has long been considered to be a key to success in traditional classrooms. The emergence of communicative language teaching and task-based learning helped to increase students’ autonomy and interaction in language classes (Hattum, 2006).
Also Platt .H, Platt. J and Richards (1992) indicated that interactionism is a view that indicates language development and social development are associated and that one cannot be understood without the other.
Students experiencing higher levels of interaction have been shown to have more positive attitudes and higher levels of achievements (Fulford and Zhang, 1993).
Moore (1989) described three types of interaction: learner-content interaction, learner-instructor interaction, and learner-learner interaction.
He defines them as follow:
- Learner-content interaction is the interaction between the learner and the subject of study.
- Learner-instructor interaction is the interaction between the learner and an expert acting as an instructor.
- Learner-learner interaction is the interaction between a learner and other learners, alone or in a group setting, with or without the physical presence of an instructor.
Among the different types of interaction at intermediate and advanced levels of communication classes, teacher-student interaction, not mentioned in Moore’s category, seems to be the least desirable one because teacher fronted classes in which most of the classroom talk time is dedicated to teachers are not what an educational system looks for (Harmer, 2000, p.4). This study mainly investigates the amount of student-teacher interaction; therefore, other types are not included.
Question-making Strategy
Chastain (1983) believed that communication is a process of give and take and it starts when one tires to fill an information gap; therefore, the purpose of the present study was making students believe that it was to their benefit to make questions on the texts by themselves because it would help them develop thinking in the target language (Fulford and Zhang 1993).
Nunan (2001) introduces question-making as a post-reading activity and in general as a learning strategy in his book on second language teaching and learning.
Richards and Renandya (2002, p.292) introduce a table of student-generated strategy list in which making questions on the reading and asking them from the author or teacher or classmates is seen as a basic strategy among others provided in the chart.
Based on the importance of communication and the direction of interaction in EFL classes, the data were collected through direct observation of the classes before and after treatment and the findings were used to answer the research question.
Method
Subjects
A hundred and fifty students, including 75 male and 75 female, of intermediate level of proficiency with the age group of 16-20 were included in this study.
Instrument
The instruments used in this study were a modified version of FCE test for homogenizing students and a demographic questionnaire.
Design and Procedure
Using stratified random sampling, 6 classes were selected to be included in the study. Two male and two female classes each with 25 students were taken as experimental groups and one male and one female class were taken as control groups. At the beginning of the term, they were given a placement exam and only those with intermediate level of proficiency were selected to be included in both groups. The observation of the classes started the second session and the number of utterances exchanged and their direction were carefully noted down by the researcher. The third session the treatment started only in experimental groups and the control groups worked on the common syllabus used in the institute. Also a demographic questionnaire was given to collect necessary information about subjects. The teachers asked students to make questions on reading texts at home and ask them from their classmates when they were called on to the board. At the end of the session the teacher collected their papers took them home and corrected the questions students had made without assigning any mark. There was no direct correction to increase the students’ motivation to actively take part in class activities. Finally at the end of the term, the whole experiment lasted 3 months, the researcher conducted the second observation to compare the data collected to that collected at the beginning of the term to know about the possible changes the strategy training and application brought about in experimental groups.
Findings and Results
The data was analyzed through the application of Statistical Package for Social sciences (SPSS) version 14. The significance was set at p<.05. The difference between the means before and after the treatment was 859.50-588.75=270.75. Using the two-tailed t-test, the t-value was calculated 0.035, which was lower than the critical value. Therefore, it could be concluded with 95% confidence that question-making as a post-reading activity affected the amount of student-teacher interaction by increasing it.
This means that this simple strategy can best be included in syllables to increase students’ speaking time and remove the teacher from being the only center of attention in the class.
References
Chastain K. (1988). Developing Second-Language Skills. HARCOURT BRACE JOVANOVICH, PUBLISHERS USA, Canada.
Cheon, H. ( 2003). The Viability of Computer Mediated Communication in the Korean Secondary EFL Classroom. Asian EFL Teaching Articles. Retrieved at file:///C|/website/march03.sub2.htm
Freeman, L. (2003). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford University Press.
Fulford, C. and Zhang, S. (1993). Perceptions of interaction: The critical predictor in distance learning. The American Journal of Distance Education, 7, 3, 8-21. Retrieved May 3, 2008 from htt://www.ia@interaction.org.
Harmer, J. (2000). How to teach English. Malaysia: VVP. Hattum. (2006). The Communicative Approach Rethought. Retrieved July 10, 2008 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teaching_English_as_a_foreign_language.
Moore, M. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American Journal of DisImproving Teacher-Student Interaction in the EFL Classroom: An Action Research Report.
Nunan D. (2001). Second Language Teaching and Learning. HEINLE & HEINLE PUBLISHERS,ITP An International Thomson Publishing Company.
Platt. J, Platt. H and Richards. (1992). Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics
Richards, J.C. and Renandya A.W. (2002).Methodology in Language Teaching. An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge University Press.