CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research Background

Most people know that learning anything involves an interaction. An

interaction is a kind of action that occurs as two or more objects which have an effect

each other. A good interaction between teacher and students in teaching and learning

process does not only improve students’ knowledge but also makes the class become

more interactive and active. As stated by Yu (2008, p.49), interaction facilitates not

only language development but also learners’ development. In the classroom

interaction, both the teachers and the students can create the learning opportunities

which motivate the students’ interest and potential to communicate with others.

Then, Mackey (1999) cited by Suryanti (2015, p.248) mentioned that it is important

for a teacher to create interactive learning activity where students can communicate

with each other to generate meaning in the target language through turn-taking,

feedback, and negotiation. Swain (2000) cited by Yu (2008, p.48) in his journal

entitled "Interaction in EFL classes" mentioned three components of classroom

interaction namely collaborative dialogue, negotiation, and co-construction. The

explanation for those components is as follow:

1
 Swain (2000) cited by Yu (2008, p.48) said that collaborative dialogue is the

building dialogue, in which language use and language learning can co-occur or it

may be realized in the format of an everyday conversation. Classroom interaction

should take the role as collaborative dialogues do for its significance in

communicative language teaching. Then according to Yu (2008, p.48), collaborative

dialogue happens effectively between learner and learner or learner and teacher.

While the term of negotiation plays significant role in classroom interaction.

Allwright (1984) cited by Yu (2008, p.49) stated that negotiation should be person-

to-person communication since the conditions would be satisfactory. The learners

who negotiated the input achieved higher vocabulary acquisition scores in the

immediate post test, and what is more important, they maintained this advantage over

time. There are mainly two negotiated forms in classroom interaction: face-to-face

peer negotiation and corrective feedback negotiation provided by the instructor.

Some researchers may present three forms of negotiation includes self-negotiation. In

this paper, self-negotiation is considered a type of self-regulation or construction

since it requires the close cooperation between learners and learners, learners and

teachers. Finally, co-construction can be the involvement of learners' action, activity,

skill, ideology, emotion or other cultural etc in the learning activity (Young 1998 in

Yu 2008, p.49).

From the explanation above, it can be concluded that the classroom

interaction in the classroom is not only the activity or skill performed in class but it is

also a potential to communicate each other. Charles & Ronald (1971, p.5) stated that

teacher need to communicate with students because communication is a central part

2
of learning process. Furthermore, Charles & Ronald (1971, p.5) stated that there are

two kinds of communication namely one-way and two way communication. One

way communication indicates a flow information, theories, facts from one person to

another but there is no opportunity for the listener to respond or react directly. While,

the two waya communication indicates flow information, theories, fact among two or

more person where the sender of message has much greater opportunity to get

responses or reaction from his listener.

Language is used to communicate to other people like sharing thought,

feeling and ideas. Gordon (2007, p.78) said "a language is a primary means to create

interaction between the teacher and the students. It is not only the target of

instruction but also the tool that helps the teachers and the students develop an

emotional bond".

In brief, the language used in the teaching and learning process will facilitate

communicative interaction between teachers and students. However, not all students

can use the same language well, especially the students who learn English as a

foreign language. For example, in an English classroom, it is always found that some

students usually avoid speaking in English with the teachers or friends because they

worry to make mistakes or they do not respond the teacher who asks a question in

English. Of course, the situation will not create a good classroom interaction.

The previous research was conducted by Huraerah in 2013 entitled "The

Analysis of Verbal Interaction between Teacher and Students in the Classroom”. The

subjects of the research were the English teacher and 40 students of senior high

3
school in Bandung. The research result indicated that the teacher was more dominant

than the students in asking questions, giving directions, and accepting ideas etc.

Based on the writer's observation conducted on December 20th, 2015 at the

fourth grade classroom of elementary school at Fatih Bilingual School, it was found

that an English teacher who taught English for twenty students in the classroom

emphasized that students used English in communication activity in class. During the

teaching and learning process, they used English to communicate each other. For

students who used another language would be given a consequence. For example,

when the teacher asked a question in English, the students had to answer in English.

If they used Indonesian or Acehnese, their scores would be decreased. As explained

by the English teacher, even though the students usually speak in another language at

home or in daily life, but in the classroom they must use English to communicate

with their teachers or friends.

Dealing with the interaction between the teachers and the students in the

classroom in using English, it could be observed that some students participated to

speak with the teacher in English while others seemed constantly worried to speak

and tend to be passive. In order words it can be said there were less interaction

between teacher and student in communicative activity during the learning process in

using English because most students did not want to be actively responding to the

teacher's question, explanation, or opinion. In oder words the communication

happend in the class was more dominant in a one way communication pattern where

the teacher transfer information or theories but she has little response from students.

4
 Therefore, the writer is interested to conduct a research about the interaction

between a teacher and the students in using English during the teaching and learning

process of the fourth grade students to find out which kind of communication

patterns, one way or two ways communication more dominant happend between the

teacher and students in speaking class. Hence, this research entitled “The Interaction

between Teacher and Young Learners in a Bilingual Classroom (A Study at

Elementary School in Fatih Bilingual School)".

1.2 Research Problem

The problems of this research are formulated as in the following questions:

Which kind of teacher-student communicative pattern, one way or two ways

communication pattern more dominant in English classroom?

1.3 Research Objective

This research aims to find out the interaction between the teachers and the

fourth grade students of Elementary School at Fatih Bilingual School. Therefore the

research objective is stated as follows:

To find out kind of teacher-student communication patterns, one way or two

ways communication pattern which is more dominant in English classroom.

1.4 Research Significance

The result of this research can significantly be useful for teachers, readers,

and other researchers in the classroom as follows:

5
 For teachers, this research result will give knowledge about how to improve

the interaction between students and teacher and also the students and the students in

classroom especially in communication activity.

For readers, this research result will give an understanding about the

interaction between the teacher and the students in the process of teaching and

learning in classroom.

For other researchers, this research result can be used as a preliminary basis

to do further research related to the classroom interaction.

1.4 Research Scope

The scope of this study is limited to discuss about the kind of oral

communication happened between the teacher and student during teaching and

learning process in order to find out kind of communication patterns, one way or two

ways communication which is more dominant in class 4 at the elementary of Fatih

Bilingual School semester 1 in the education year of 2016/2017.

6
 CHAPTER 2
LITERATUREREVIEW

2.1 Classroom Interaction

2.1.1 Definition of Classroom Interaction

Wagner (1994) in Khadija (2010, p.9) stated that interaction is the activity

that require at least two objects and actions. Interaction occurs when these objects

and activity naturally influence each other. Khadija (2010, p.23) stated that

Interaction involves learners in face-to-face or teacher-learners encounters in the

classroom. Radford (2010, p.111) said "interaction appears as a tool of a

pedagogical instrument that helps the teacher to create the conditions for learning to

occur ". While, Robinson (2005, p.14) stated that through interaction, the students

and adults engage in dialogue that allows the exploration of previously unknown

paths of knowledge. This means that the heart of teaching and learning lies in

classroom interaction.

Moreover, Markee (2015, p.235) said that classroom interaction is a social

activity where the teacher and student do an interaction like talking to each other.

While, classroom interaction according to Ellis (1990) cited by Suryati (2015, p.2), it

is all communication which refers not only to those exchanges involving authentic

7
communication but to every oral exchange that occurs in the classroom. In addition,

Brown (2001) quoted by Shafira (2015, p.2) defined that classroom interaction is the

communication between teachers and learners in the classroom. He further explained

that interaction is the heart of communicative competence, it is what communication

is all about. Finally Hall and Walsh (2002, p.187) said that "classroom interaction is

one of primary means by which learning is accomplished in classroom".

From the explanation above, it can be concluded that classroom interaction

can be defined as the communicative activity between the teacher and the student or

the student and the student to achieve knowledge or teaching and learning goals.

Besides, classroom interaction is the activity done by the teacher and the student.

2.1.2 The Importance of Classroom Interaction

The classroom interaction becomes one of important aspects in teaching and

learning of a school because it has some contributions that are stated as follows: Hall

and Verplaetse (2000, p.163) stated that through classroom interaction, students can

develop their social needs, communication, and academic. Besides, the students have

opportunity to share their knowledge each other, etc. In addition, Dewey, et.al (1998,

p.32) stated that the classroom interaction promotes the construction of fresh

continuities between the school and its goals.

According to Mammimo cited by Chiu, et.al (2013, p.36), classroom

interaction is important because it can play fundamental role of effort to overcome

the contextual disadvantages and enable students to attain adequate knowledge and

master the content. By their nature, the classroom interaction engages students’

participation. In addition, Allwright and Breen (1988) quoted by Nurmasitah (2010,

8
p.31) state that interaction is important because the learner can derive meaning from

classroom activity. Besides, interaction gives learners the opportunities to state their

own speech (the scaffolding principles)

2.2 Types of Classroom Interaction

There are three types of interaction in the classroom stated by Harry, et.al

(2001, p.20) namely student-student interaction, teacher-student Interaction and

student-content interaction.

2.2.1 Student-student Interaction

Harry, et.al (2001, p.22) explained that the student-student interaction is the

interaction between one learner and other learner, alone or in group setting without

the real time presence of the teacher. Moore (1989) in Gonzales (2016, p.70) stated

that student-student interaction refers to exchange of information, ideas with or

without the presence of the teacher. Then, Badrul (2001, p.181) stated that student-

student interaction is a situation in which student work together to master new skill

or knowledge. Johnson (1995) supports that if learner-learner interaction is well

structured and managed, it can be an important factor of cognitive development,

educational achievement of students and emerging social competencies. It can also

develop the learner's capacities through collaborative works. Scrivener (2005, p.86)

made the following diagram to show clearly how the interaction happens between the

student-student:

9
 ST ST ST ST ST ST ST
ST ST ST ST ST ST ST
ST ST ST ST ST ST ST
ST ST ST ST ST ST ST
ST ST ST ST ST ST ST
T

Figure 2.1 Student-student interaction

Key:
ST = student
T = teacher

Figure 2.1 shows that the interaction between student and student is more

dominant than the interaction between teacher and student.

Rivera (2009, p.49) states that in order to encourage the student-student

interaction in the speaking classroom, there are two kinds of interactional activities

that can be used. First, the teacher asks the students in pairs to make a dialogue at

home and then perform it in pairs in front of their classmates. Second, the teacher

asks the student to do a survey. In this activity, the students ask and give information

about their routines.

2.2.2 Teacher -Student Interaction

Badrul (2001, p.181) stated that teacher-student interaction is a situation in

which student and teacher engage in communication. Feedback on assignment,

questioning and answering, providing motivation are example of teacher-student

interaction. Moore (1989) in Gonzales (2016, p.70) stated that the teacher-student

10
interaction refers to the teacher's role in encouraging the student to master a content.

Harry, et.al (2001, p.20) stated that the teacher-student interaction is the interaction

between the student and the teacher who prepared the subject material. Wood’s

(1988) cited by Rivera (2009, p.58) stated that kinds of teacher-student interaction is

a teaching concept or pedagogical conversation that assists performance. The

interaction is also in the conception of human development because participating in

social cultural activity. Then, Coulthard (1977) cited in Khadija (2010, p.31) stated

that interaction happens between a teacher and a student or more. In this interaction,

the teacher might asks questions, ask student’s opinion, teaches a material, gives

directions, responses the student etc. Scrivener (2005, p.84) stated that if a teacher

spends much time to talk in the classroom, the student will have less time to interact

with each other especially in speaking practice. Of course, it will be unsatisfactory.

Therefore according to Scrivener (2005, p.86), it will be more important if the

teacher does the following ways to improve the students' interaction:

1. The teacher asks a question rather than giving explanation

2. The teacher allows time for student to think, speak, etc

3. The teacher really listens to what student say.

4. The teacher increases opportunity for student to talk.

5. The teacher makes use of pairs or group to maximize opportunity for

student to talk

6. The teacher does not always sit in front of the class, the teacher

encourages interaction between student-student rather than the

teacher-student.

11
 From the explanation, it can be concluded that the teacher should encourage

more interaction between students rather than talking to much in the classroom.

The following diagram shows the interaction happens between the teacher and

student (Scrivener, 2005, p.86):

ST ST ST ST ST ST ST
ST ST ST ST ST ST ST
ST ST ST ST ST ST ST
ST ST ST ST ST ST ST
ST ST ST ST ST ST ST
T

Figure 2.2 Teacher Student Interaction

Key:
ST= student
T = teacher

Figure 2.2 shows that the interaction between teacher and student is more

dominant than the interaction between student and student.

Then, Celce-Murcia (1989) in Abarca (2004, p.4) stated that we need to consider the

teacher-dominated, teacher-centered, and student-centered classrooms. The teacher

dominated classroom is the one where the teachers spend most of the time talking,

and the students' participation is very limited. The teacher-centered classroom is the

one where the teacher is controlling the students’ participation through some

classroom activities and students have the chance to participate. Conversely, the

student-centered classroom is the one where the students can participate more

actively. Besides, they can direct and develop the classroom activities by interacting

12
among themselves. Moreover, Romentveit (1985) cited in (2002, p.14) states that in

teacher-student interaction, the teacher often controls the content of interaction and

distribution of speaking turn.

2.2.3 Student-Content Interaction

Harry, et.al (2001, p.20) stated that student-content interaction refers to the

interaction between student and subject of study. Without the student-content

interaction, there cannot be education because it is the process of intellectually

interacting with content that results in changes in the learner's understanding.

Robert (2015, p.267) student-content interaction occurs when student engage

in active reading and writing. The students identify text that is important for recall,

analysis, clarification, and other reasons.

Badrul (2001, 181) stated that student-content interaction is situation in which

student is involved with course material. Reading text, solving problem, and

reviewing a video are examples of student-content interaction.

2.3 Components of Classroom Interaction

The components of classroom interaction are stated in the following

description including collaborative dialogue, negotiation, and co-construction:

2.3.1 Collaborative Dialogue

13
 According to Swain (2000) quoted by Yu (2008, p.48), collaborative dialogue

is a knowledge of building dialogue, in which language use and language learning

can co-occur. It is language use mediating language learning. It is cognitive activity

and it is social activity or it may be realized in the format of an everyday

conversation. Classroom interaction should take the role as collaborative dialogues

do for its significance in communicative language teaching.

Moreover, Kumpulainen and Wrey (2002, p.14) stated that collaborative

mode with small groups of students have increased in many classrooms as the

consequent. It is important for a teacher to understand better knowledge is

constructed between students while working on various learning activities.

2.3.2 Negotiation

Ellis and Barkhuizen (2005) in Khadija (2010, p.11) defined that negotiation

is a verbal exchanges that occur when the speakers do a communication. The learners

in the classroom should make the linguistic output more comprehensible for the other

learners or teacher in the class, so that they can engage with them in the interaction.

Then, based on the Long man dictionary, negotiation is what speaker do in order to

achieve successful communication (Boulima, 2015, p.4). In short, negotiation can be

defined as discussion to reach agreement. According to Allright (1984) in Yu (2008,

p.48), interactive negotiation should be person-to-person communication since the

conditions would be satisfactory.

There are mainly some negotiated forms in classroom interaction stated by

Allright (1984) in Yu (2008, p.48) as follows:

1. Face to face negotiation.

14
 It is the interaction between peer students in face to face participating

in a conversational activity to make a decision. When participating in

face to face interaction, speakers cooperate to sustain conversation

and estabilish understanding.

2. Corrective feedback negotiation provided by the teacher

Corrective feedback gives an overt indication that a learner’s output is

wrong. Corrective feedback on the other hand encourages learners to

modify their output without overtly indicating that a mistake has been

made.

3. Self-negotiation It is considered a type of self-regulation or

construction since it requires the close cooperation between learners

and learners, learners and teachers.

2.3.3 Co-construction

Jacob (1995) cited in Yu (2008, p.49) states that co-construction is the joint

creation of a form, interpretation, stance, action, activity, identity, institution, skill,

ideology, emotion or other culturally-related meaning reality. Then, foster and Ota

(2000) cited in Phlip (2004, p.50) state that co-construction is a strategy. Though co-

construction, learner assists one another to keep the conversation going to complete a

task.

2.4 One Way and Two Ways Communication

Ellis (1990) cited by Suryati (2015, p.2) stated that interaction is all

communication which refers not only to those exchanges involving authentic

15
communication but to every oral exchange that occurs in the classroom. In addition,

Brown (2001) quoted by Shafira (2015, p.2) defined that classroom interaction is the

communication between teachers and learners in the classroom. He further explained

that interaction is the heart of communicative competence, it is what communication

is all about.

Charles & Ronald (2000, p.5) stated that there are two communication pattern

namely one way communication and two way communication. The differences of

both communication can be seen by their own characteristics or differences.

2.4.1. Characteristics of One Way Communication

Harris and Nelson (2008, p.91) explained "one way communication is

essensially top-down "I talk and you listen". Then Sellnow (2005, p.11) stated that

one way communication pattern is the speaker sends a message to a listener who

receives a message.

West and Lynn (2009, p.12) said that the characteristic of one way

communication is a process to transmit a message from a sender to receiver can be in

written or spoken. Furthermore, Fielding (2006, p.502) stated that in one way

communication, the speaker prepares and sends a message without receiving

involvement from the listener.

Charles & Ronald (2000, p.5) stated that the important characteristic of one

way communication is that the listener has no opportunity to respond or to react

immadiately or directly to the speaker.

16
 Hence, based on the above explanation it can be conluded that one way

communication is a process to give information, idea, or message without receiving a

respond from the listener.

2.4.2. Characteristics of Two Ways Communication

Butterick (2011, p.28) stated that in term of communication model, the

circular is also called as two way communication in which the speaker and listener

involved in communication activity.

Charles & Ronald ( 2000, p.6) stated that the important characteristic of two

ways communication is that the speaker who sends a message getting respond

immadiately or directly from the listener.

Fielding (2006, p.502) stated that in two way communication, both speaker

and listener are involves in creating a message. In other word the speaker receives a

responds from the listener. Nelson (2008, p.91) explained that two way

communication is in question activity, discussion, and interaction.

In brief, it can be conluded that two way communication is a process to give

information, idea or message, then the listener gives a responds. In other words, there

is a communication activity between the speaker and listener.

2.4.3 The Differences of One Way and Two Ways Communication

Charles & Ronald (2000, p.6) described that the differences one way and two

ways communication as follow:

17
 1. One way communication is more efficient than two ways communication. It

permits the transmissions of more information in a shorter periode of time

than two way communication.

2. One way communication is less accurate than two ways communication.

Although one way communication efficient in permitting the communicator

to send more information, the listeners' understanding of the information sent

under the onw way communication is less complete than under the two way

communication.

3. One way communication does not permit the development of common

language betwee the communicator and listener. While, under the two way

communication, the listener can participate in a development of by a common

language by suggesting terminology, concept, amd ideas.

2.5 The Previous Study of Classroom Interaction

A study was conducted by Wilujeng in 2013 entitled "Classroom Interaction

between Teacher and Young Learners". The research was conducted at a

kindergarten in Salatiga. The subjects of the research were the teacher and all

students who joined the classroom. It was found that the interaction happened during

the teaching and learning process was only between the teacher to the students and

the students to the teacher. The interaction between the students and the students did

not appear because they were not given time to discuss in pairs or groups. Only few

students participated actively.

Then, Nordlun in 2004 conducted a research on 112 senior high school

students with the same problem found that the typical communication in a classroom

18
is a one-way communication where the teacher talks and the students are given the

opportunity to say a few words.

Huraerah in 2013 conducted a study entitled "The Analysis of Verbal

Interaction between Teacher and Students in the Classroom”. The subjects of the

research were the English teacher and 40 students of senior high school in Bandung.

The research result indicated that the teacher was more dominant than the students in

asking questions, giving directions, and accepting ideas etc.

19
 CHAPTER III
RESEARCH DESIGN

3.1 Research Method

This research is a qualitative research. According to Bricki and Green (2002,

p.3), qualitative research aims to answer questions about ‘what’, ‘how’ or ‘why’ of a

phenomenon rather than ‘how many’ or ‘how much’. Then, Hancock (1998, p.2)

says that "qualitative research is concerned with developing explanation of social

phenomena and answer to questions which begin with why and how ".

Match stated that there are three qualitative methods such as participant

observation, in-depth interviews, and focus groups. While, Larsen& Michael (1991,

p.24) stated that qualitative research methodology includes participant observation,

non participant etc.

Therefore, for obtaining data needed, the nonparticipant method is used.

Larsen & Michael (1991, p.24) stated that by using the non participant method, the

researcher observe the activity and leaves them free to take note or make recording

during the observation.

3.2 Research Location

This research is conducted in Fatih Bilingual School which is located in

Jl.Sultan Malikul Saleh no.103, Lamlagang, Banda Aceh. It was established and

started giving education on 2005. The school provides bilingual education in natural

20
and social science education; even more they provide a foreign language such as

English. In addition, the school becomes one of the most favorite school in Banda

Aceh.

In addition, Fatih Billingual School emphasizes the students to use English

during teaching and learning process, therefore the writer is interested to conduct the

research in the school.

3.3 Research Subject and Object

The population of this study is the students and the English teachers in Fatih

Bilingual School which consists of some classes. Since it is impossible to take all

students and the English teachers for this research, the writer took the sample of the

research by using a purposive sampling technique. Match, et al (2005, p.5) stated that

purposive sampling is one of the most common sampling strategies, groups

participants according to preselected criteria relevant to a particular research

question. Sample sizes which may or may not be fixed prior to data collection,

depends on the resources and time available, as well as the study’s objectives.

Therefore the writer took all of the students and the English teacher in class

IV since there only one class at fourth grade. The total students in the class are 27

students and an English teacher. The writer took the sample because the students in

the class has never been used by other researchers as the research sample in the same

problem. Besides, the students are active students in the class therefore the writer

want to find out which communication pattern is more dominant performed by the

teacher and the student in speaking activity.

21
 While, the objects of this research is the oral communication performed by

the teacher and the students during teaching and learning process.

3.4 Source and Kinds of Data

The source of data is collected through teacher-students activities in teaching

and learning process especially in the interaction between the teacher and the

students in speaking activity. While the source of data collected by observing the

teaching and learning process. Hancock (1998, p.2) states that qualitative data can be

collected through direct encounters with individuals, interviews or by observation.

Therefore the source of data can be obtained by conducting classroom observation.

3.5 Research Instrument

3.5.1 Observational sheet.

Observational sheet was made by the writer that includes some oral

communication indicators consisting both linier (one way communication) and

circular (two way communication) activity. The checklist technique was used in

which the writer put a chek on the available column if the items performed by the

teacher and the students in the teaching and learning process. Then the writer wrote

the teacher's and students’ statement or response about the spoken communication

happen between the teacher and the students in the observational sheet. See

Appendix1 for the observational sheet.

3.5.2. Video record

22
 Video record was used to record the class activity because it was difficult to

remember all kinds of interaction performing during the teaching and learning

process. Or there might be some indicators were not listed on the observational sheet

so the writer can play the video to see the class activity again. 3.6 Technique of

3.6 Data Collection

Bricki and Green (2002, p.20) states that to understand the complexities of

many situations, direct participation and observation can be the best research

technique to collect the data. Therefore, the technique of data collection in this

research was by conducting direct observation activities.

Before conducting the observation activity, the writer first asked the Fatih

Billingual School headmaster's permittion for conducting the research. After that, the

writer met the English teacher in class IV to ask the schedule of English class.

Next, the writer conducted observation activity in which the writer directly observed

the teaching and learning process in class IV. The observation activity was held once

based on the schedule given by the teacher. During the teaching and learning process

the writer gave a cheklist for each item on the observational sheet if the the

observation indicator did by the teacher and the students.

1.7 Technique of Data Analysis

In order to analyze the data, the writer used the technique of data alanysis

suggested by Hooberman (1994) cited in Talukder (2014, p.74) as follows:

1. Data Display

23
 Hooberman (1994) cited in Talukder (2014, p.74) stated that data display

goes a step beyond data reduction to compressed assembly of information that

permits conclusion. A display can be an extended piece of text or a diagram, chart, or

matrix that provides a new way of arranging and thinking about the more textually

embedded data. Therefore, in this step, the writer presented the data by describing

the linier and circular communication performed by the teacher and the students

during teaching and learning process in order find out which communication’s

pattern was more dominant in the class.

2. Conclusion

Hooberman (1994) cited in Talukder (2014, p.74) stated that this conclusion

involves stepping back to consider what the analyzed data mean and to assess their

implications for the questions at hand. In this step, the writer concidered and made a

conclusion about which communicative of interaction that was more dominant in the

class.

References

24
Abarca M.F. (2004). Interaction in the English Classroom; An Explory Study.
Vol.4 (1)

Boulima, J. (2015). Negotiated Interaction in Target Language Classroom

Discourse. Hersye: IGI Global

Bricki, N & Green. (2002). A Guide to Using Qualitative Research

Methodology. http://hdl.handle.net/10144/84230

Badrul, K. 2001. Web-Based Training. New Jersey: Educational Technology

Publications, Inc.

Charles, B.,& Ronald, B. (2000). One-Way and Two-Way Communication in

Classroom. Ohio: Cincinati University

Chiu, M.A. et.al (2013). Education and the Global Age. London

Dewey, J. (1998). The Challenge of Classroom Practice. Amsterdam: Teacher

College Press

Gay, L. R., and Airasian, P. (2006). Educational Research: Competencies for

Analysis and Application. (8thed). New Jersey: Pearson Prenties Hall.

Gordon, T. (2007). Teaching Young Children a Second Language. America:

Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc

Gonzales, R.M (2016). User Centred Design Strategy. Harsye: IGI Global

Guillen, M.T.F. (2007). The Role of Interaction In the Young Learners Classroom.
Encuentro17, pp. 6-14

Hary, K. (2001). Distance Education. London: Routledge

Hancock, B. (1998). An Introduction Of Qulaitative Research. Trent Focus

Hall, J.K. (2000). Second and Foreign Language Learning Through Claasroom
Interaction. New Jersey: LEA Publisher

Khadija, K. (2010). The Effect of Classroom Interaction on Developing Learner'

Speaking Skill. Thesis. Constantine: Constantine University

Larnsen. D, et al. (1991). An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research.

Oxon: Pearson Education Ltd

25
Huraerah, N.R. (2013). The Analysis of Verbal Interaction between Teacher and
Student in the Classroom. Thesis. Bandung: UPI

Jinhua. (2008). English Classroom Interaction Between Slow Learner and Teacher.
Thesis. Norway. University of Oslo

Markee, N. (2015). The Handbook of Discourse Classroom Interaction. Malden:

Son, Inc

Philp, J. (2004). Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning. Oxon: Roudledge

Micky, P. 2006. Assessing Young Language Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

Nunan, D. (2011). Practical English Language Teaching (International

Edition).New York: Mc Graw Hill

Nurmasyitah, R. (2010). A Study of Classroom Interaction Characteristicis in

English. Thesis. Semarang: Semarang University

Robinson. (2015). The Transformative of Classroom Interaction. London: Flamer

Press

Robert, E. (2015). Teacher-Student Interaction in Online Learning Environment.

Texas: IGI Global.

Scrivener, J. (2005). Learning Teaching. UK: Macmilliland Education

Shafira,M. (2015). Classroom Interaction: A Key to Effective Teaching and Learning

in Secondary Schools. Vol.4 (1), 44-52

Suryati, N. Classroom Interaction Strategy Employed by The English Teacher at

Lower Secondary School. Malang. Vol.26 (2)

Sibley, M.L. (1990). Teacher-Students Interaction in ESL Classroom: An

Investigation of Three Part Excanghe, Teacher Feedback, and The Role of
Gender : Thesis. Iowa State University

Suryana. (2010). Model Praktis Penelitian KuantitatiF dan Kualitatif. Jakarta:

Universitas Indonesia

Yu, R.( 2008). Interaction in EFL Classroom. Vol. 4 (4), 48

26