the main factors affecting english classroom interaction of · 2009-03-11 · 1 the islamic...
TRANSCRIPT
1
The Islamic University of Gaza
Deanery of Higher Studies
Faculty of Education
Department of Curricula and Methodology
The Main Factors Affecting English Classroom Interaction of
the 11th Grade Students in North Gaza Governmental Schools
Thesis
Submitted by
Randa Yousuf Al-Majdalawi
Supervised by
Prof. Dr.Ezzo Afana Dr. Awad Keshta
Thesis Submitted to the Department of Curricula and Methodology in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Education
Feb./2005
2
Dedication
To my father and mother who deserve my great love
and respect
To my brothers and sisters…
To my friends..
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE MOST GRACIOUS, THE MOST
MERCIFUL
All praise is to Allah suphanah wa taala for enabling me to complete this
research.
I would like to acknowledge my sincere thanks and gratitude to my
supervisors: Prof. Dr. Ezzo Afana and Dr. Awad Keshta for their insightful
guidance.
Special thanks are extended to Prof. Dr. Ehsan Al-agha who helped me a
lot in the beginning of my writing this research.
My deepest thanks also go to my parents for their limitless giving as well as
to my brothers, sisters, friends and relatives for their unending support.
Finally, I must gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the head of
supervision department and English language supervisors of North Gaza
Directorate for administering the observation checklist to the whole sample
when I was unable to observe them because I work as a teacher and there was
not enough time. I am thankful to them for their help and cooperation.
4
Abstract
The Main Factors Affecting English Classroom Interaction of the 11th Grade Students in North Gaza Governmental Schools
This study aimed at identifying the main factors affecting English
classroom interaction of the 11th grade students in North Gaza Governmental
Schools .
To achieve the aim of the study, the researcher has applied two valid and
reliable tools: a questionnaire which consists of 40 items divided into three
main domains: factors related to the teacher, factors related to the student, and
factors related to the textbook and an observation card which consists of 30
items divided into two domains: the teacher`s performance and the student`s
performance.
Percentage, means, Pearson correlation, Mann-whitney test and Kruskal
Wallis test were used to analyze the data statistically.
This study depended on two samples. The first sample consisted of 30
teachers ( a survey sample) of 11th grade English teachers of the Governmental
Schools of North Gaza Directorate of Education for the second semester of the
scholastic year 2003-2004. The second sample consisted of 30 classrooms: 17
classrooms of male students and 13 classrooms of female in North Gaza
Governmental Schools.
The findings of this study showed that:
1- The main factors affecting English classroom interaction were in this
order: factors related to the teacher, factors related to the textbook, and
factors related to the student.
2- The level of English classroom interaction of 11th grade students in
North Gaza Governmental Schools was moderate.
3- There were statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05 ) between
11th grade student in English classroom interaction due to the gender of
students in favor of female students.
5
4- There were no statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05 )
between 11th grade student in English classroom interaction due to the
specialization of students (science & humanities).
5- There were no statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05 )
between 11th grade student in English classroom interaction due to the
location of school.
According to the findings of the study, it was recommended that
teachers should be trained to use the various techniques that enable them to
choose the proper techniques relevant to their teaching situation in order to
apply different types of classroom interactions.
The researcher`s name: Randa Yousuf Al-majdalawi
Supervised by : Prof. Dr. Ezzo Afana and Dr: Awad Keshta
The Islamic University of Gaza
6
Table of contents
Dedication I Acknowledgements II English Abstract III Table of Content V List of Tables VII Chapter One:
Introduction and Background of the Study 1 Statement of the Problem 6 Research Questions 6 Purposes of the Study 7 Significance of the Study 7 Definition of Terms 8 Limitations of the Study 9 Summary 9 Chapter Two: Review of Related Literature
Section 1 An Overview of Classroom Interaction
11
The Meaning of Classroom Interaction 11 Characteristics of an Interactive Classroom 13 The Teacher`s Role in an Interactive Classroom 15 The Learner`s Role in an Interactive Classroom 16 Classroom Climate 19 Motivation 20 Section II Review of Related Literature 24 The Importance of Classroom Interaction 24 Factors Affecting English Classroom Interaction 30 Factors Related to the Teacher`s Performance 30 Factors Related to the Student`s Performance 47 Factors Related to the Textbook 58 Commentary on the previous Studies 61 Summary 63 Chapter Three: Methodology
Sample of the Study 64 Variables of the Study 65 Instruments of the Study 67 The Questionnaire 67 The Observation Card 72 Research Methodology 78
7
Procedures of the Study 78 Statistical Analysis 79 Summary 80 Chapter Four: The Results of the Study
The Answer of the First Question 81 The Answer of the Second Question 87 The Answer of the Third Question 90 The Answer of the Fourth Question 94 The Answer of the Fifth Question 98 Chapter Five: Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations
The Discussion of the Results of the First Question 103 The Discussion of the Results of the Second Question 107 The Discussion of the Results of the Third Question 109 The Discussion of the Results of the Fourth Question 110 The Discussion of the Results of the Fifth Question 110 Conclusion 112 Recommendations 113 References 116 Appendixes Appendix A : List of Juries Appendix B : The Questionnaire Appendix C : The Observation Card
127 128 129 134
Arabic Abstract 138
8
List of tables
No.
Table
Page
1- Sample of classroom distribution according to the gender of
students
65
2- Sample of classroom distribution according to the specialization of
students
66
3- Sample of classroom distribution according to the location of
school
66
4- Alpha coefficient of the questionnaire reliability. 68
5- Correlation coefficient of the items in the first domain of the
questionnaire.
69
6- Correlation coefficient of the items in the second domain of the
questionnaire.
71
7- Correlation coefficient of the items in the third domain of the
questionnaire.
71
8- Correlation coefficient of each domain with the total degree of the
questionnaire
72
9- Correlation coefficient of the first domain of the observation card 74
10- Correlation coefficient of the second domain of the observation
card.
75
11- Correlation coefficient of each domain with the total degree of the
observation card
76
12- Alpha coefficient of the observation card reliability. 77
13- Holsti equation of the observation card. 78
14- Means and percentages of the first domain of the questionnaire 82
15- Means and percentages of the second domain of the questionnaire 83
16- Means and percentages of the third domain of the questionnaire 83
17- The total means and percentages of the whole questionnaire 84
18- Means and percentages of the first domain of the observation card 88
9
19- Means and percentages of the second domain of the observation
card
89
20 The total means, percentages and levels of the observation card 90
21- Means, Z, U values and significant level in the first domain of the
observation card due to the students` gender
91
22- Means, Z, U values and significant level in the second domain of
the observation card due to the students` gender
92
23- The total values of means, U, Z and Sig level of the whole
observation card due to the gender of students
94
24- Means, Z, U values and significant level in the first domain of the
observation card due to the students` specialization
95
25- Means, Z, U values and significant level in the second domain of
the observation card due to the students` specialization
96
26- The total values of means, U, Z and Sig level of the whole
observation card due to the specialization of students
97
27- Means, Chi-square, DF and significant level of the first domain of
the observation card due to the location of school
98
28- Means, Chi-square, DF and significant level of the second domain
of the observation card due to the location of school
100
29- The total values of means, Chi-square, DF and Sig. level of the
whole observation card due to the location of school.
102
10
Chapter One
Background of the Study Introduction The modern school is not an instrument simply for training of the mind: it
is not purely a machine of instruction: it is more consciously seen to be an
institution which reflects and thus shapes the social group in which it exists. To
be a successful teacher in this institution, more is demanded for a student than
academic achievement. A student must also acquire the ability to interact in
socially acceptable and effective ways with others.
The classroom is a place where teachers and learners come together and
language learning happens. Language learning happens as a result of the
reactions among the teachers and learners. The learners bring with them to
classrooms their whole experience of learning and of life, along with their own
reasons for being there, and their own particular needs that they hope to see
satisfied. And the teacher also brings into the classroom the curriculum, often
embodied in a textbook. But no matter what they all bring, language learning
still depends on how they react to each other (learner to learner as well as
teacher to learner) when they all get together in the classroom. ( Allwright &
Baily, 1994:18)
The classroom is not a place where the teacher just carries out
predetermined routines, but rather a place where various factors interact. These
11
factors are the students and teachers, including their educational and social
backgrounds, experience, knowledge and expectations (Tsui,1995: 23).
Social interaction plays an important role in the development of intellectual
and other abilities of the individual. Here, we can cite the example of wolf-
children of Midnapur ( Amla and Kamla) who, in their infancy, were taken by
wolves and were brought up in their company. These children developed a
behavior characteristic of animals as walking on four, eating flesh, howling the
language of wolves. They were retarded in their intellectual development.
( Chauhan, 1998:520).
Allwright and Baily (1994:19) pointed out that the success of the
interaction between the elements in the classroom can not be taken for granted
and can not be guaranteed just by exhaustive planning. This is because
classroom interaction is a cooperative effort among the participants. Each
participant determines the direction and outcome of the interaction. They
further pointed out that:
Interaction, in a class or anywhere, has to be managed, as it goes a long, no matter how much has gone into it beforehand… it has to be managed by everyone taking part, not just by teacher, because interaction is obviously not something you just do to people, but something people do together, collectively.
Therefore, cooperative learning can be defined as a strategy for the
classroom that is used to increase motivation and retention, to help students
develop a positive image of self and others, to provide a vehicle for critical
thinking and problem solving and to encourage collaborative social skills.
12
Cooperative learning can be characterized in the following Chinese proverb:
Tell me, I will forget Show me, and I will remember
Involve me, and I will learn (Christison, 1994:140)
Merely putting students in groups is not enough. Students` interaction needs to
be structured to match instructional goals. In the ESL/ EFL classroom,
developing proficiency in reading, writing, listening, and speaking the target
language as well as acquiring knowledge of culture, are core instructional
goals. Student’s interaction also needs to be structured so that the many
benefits of peer interaction approaches can come about. ( Ilola, 1995:2)
Moreover, Leming ( as cited in Berman, 1997:108) stated that curricula that
involved peer interaction, most often through group discussion and activities
where students were actively involved in the collective exploration of attitudes
and values in an open and democratic atmosphere, were found to be
consistently effective in producing attitudinal change.
In Gazan secondary schools, English is learned for two main utilitarian
purposes. One is to pass the final examination in English because it is an
obligatory school subject that has to be passed in order to join a university or
college, or to get a better job. The second is to enable them to further their
education at one of the Palestinian universities where English is a medium of
instruction and most textbooks, references and journals are in English. The
assumption is that the students` own purpose for learning English is mainly
13
educational. Thus, the ultimate aim of teaching English in Gaza Strip can be
said to be that of enabling the students to develop a basic proficiency in the
language skills needed for study in Palestinian universities or abroad, so that
they can successfully survive in academic situations. These situations include
understanding and producing contextualized informative English (Al-Masri,
1993:22).
Aqel (as cited in Keshta, 2000:8) considered the following points as
problems facing the teaching of English in the Gaza Strip:
1- At the high school level, there was a decline in students` performance,
particularly during the seven years of Intifada (i.e uprising against the
Israeli occupation), which disrupted the whole educational process,
since students were almost the only sector of society which were
involved in these patriotic actions.
2- The average class size was quite large (45-50). Consequently, in such
an environment it was extremely difficult for students to get the proper
care and attention.
3- Some teachers were not motivated and well trained to teach English in
the Palestinian schools, and some of them had entered the teaching
profession because they were unable to find other jobs.
4- The vast differences in vocabulary and structure between the Arabic
and English languages made learning English more complicated.
Moreover, the classical methods adopted in teaching English, along
14
with the limitations of unqualified teachers, lowered the student
performance in English.
There are different studies which deal with the classroom interaction.
Nashwan (1989) analyzed the verbal interaction of the students. Al-Ghussain
(2001) investigated English oral communication and specified necessary
techniques that should be applied by English language teachers in order to
achieve effective English oral communication. Al-Ghaunami (2003) examined
the effect of a suggested video program on developing the communicative
skills of the learners of English in Gaza Governorates. These studies described
the methods of teaching English in Gaza that do not provide opportunities for
the students to use language functionally to express their opinions or discuss
something.
From the researcher own experience, she has taught English language at
prep. School for four years, the researcher has come cross students who, by
initiating and sustaining conversations through taking turns, caused other
students to use language with them. In contrast, there is another type of
students who do not seem to want to interact in class. Lack of interaction can
take many forms: constant chattering in class, not listening to the teacher,
failure to do any homework, and blunt refusal to do certain activities.
The researcher feels that there are serious factors affecting English
classroom interaction. This issue was not raised before and was not given
enough attention by researchers in Palestine. To deal effectively with English
classroom interaction, one must study the main factors affecting English
15
classroom interaction. Mainly there are three mechanisms that operate in the
classroom interaction: the teacher, the student and the textbook.
Statement of the problem:
The problem of the study can be stated in the following main question:
What are the main factors affecting English classroom interaction of the
11th grade students in North Gaza Governmental Schools?
Research Questions:
To achieve the purpose of the study, the research addressed the following
minor questions which emanate from the main question:
1- What are the main factors affecting English classroom interaction of the
11th grade students in North Gaza governmental Schools according to the
teachers` point of view?
2- What is the level of English classroom- interaction of the 11th grade students
in North Gaza Governmental Schools?
3- Are there statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05 ) between the 11th
grade students of English classroom-interaction due to the gender of students
( female and male)?
4- Are there statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05) between the11th
grade students of English classroom- interaction due to the specialization,
(science and humanities)?
5- Are there statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05) between the 11th
grade students of English classroom- interaction due to the location of school?
16
Purposes of the Study
The purposes of this study are:
1- To identify the main factors affecting English classroom interaction of the
11th grade students.
2- To identify the level of English classroom-interaction of the 11th grade
students.
3- To highlight whether the gender ( male and female) of students has an
impact on the English classroom-interaction.
4- To highlight whether the specialization (science and humanities) of the
students has an impact on the English class-interaction.
5- To highlight whether the location of school has an impact on the English
classroom interaction.
Significance of the Study
It is hoped that this study will benefit:
A- English teachers: because it identifies the factors affecting English
classroom interaction in order to increase classroom interaction.
B- Educational supervisors: because it identifies the main factors affecting
English classroom interaction that supervisors should concentrate on in
their observations to classrooms and give more recommendations in
this issue.
17
C- Text book writers and curricula designers to concentrate on these
factors in order to vary the textbook activities to apply different types of
classroom interactions.
D- Educational administrators who supply the schools with their needs of
materials and facilities.
Definition of Terms:
The researcher used the following definitions:
Factor is an element or cause that contributes to a particular result or
situation (BBC English Dictionaty,1992: 406).
Interaction is a cooperative effort among participants. Each participant has
as much to contribute as every other participant in determining the
direction and outcome of the interaction ( Tsui 1995:6-7).
Teacher’s performance: For the purpose of this study, it refers to the way
a teacher organizes what goes in the classroom. It includes such factors as
what the teacher says; the teacher’s questioning behaviors; how the teacher
gives instructions; and keeps students on task.
Student's performance: For the purpose of this study, it refers to the way
students work in the classroom. It includes such factors as students`
interaction; students` answers; students` questions; and students`
clarifications.
18
Limitations of the Study
The study was conducted on and limited to the teachers who taught English
of the 11th grade and to the 11th grade students (male and female in two
streams: science and humanities) who enrolled in the scholastic year 2003-
2004 in North Gaza Governmental Schools.
Summary
In this chapter, the researcher provided a relevant introduction presenting
the importance of the subject. Also, the researcher introduced the statement of
the problem, the purposes, the significance, the limitation, and the definition of
terms of the study.
19
Chapter Two
Review of Related Literature
This chapter is divided into two sections. The first one aims at discussing the
main related points to the study. It views the meaning of classroom interaction,
the characteristics of an interactive classroom, the roles of the teacher and
learners, and explains the effect of classroom climate and students` motivation
on the classroom interaction.
The second section aims at reviewing the related literature to the current
study. This section is divided into two parts: (1) related literature to the
importance of classroom interaction, and (2) related literature to the factors
affecting English classroom interaction.
20
Section I
An Overview of Classroom Interaction
The Meaning of Classroom Interaction
Researchers defined this term by different definitions:
Allwright and Bailey (1994:19) stated that classroom interaction means
cooperative work; it is not something you just do to people, but something
people do together, collectively. In classrooms, it is usually considered normal
for the teacher to run the show, to make many of the managerial decisions
about who should talk, to whom, and on what topic. Also learners make
significant contribution to the management of the interaction that takes place in
the classroom. And these contributions are crucial to the success of the
interaction, and to the success of the lesson itself as a social event in the lives
of both teachers and learners.
In a related direction, Barnes ( 1976, as cited in Johnson, 1995:7) pointed
that interaction means participation. Teachers and students are likely to have
different interpretations of the activities in which they participate. Therefore,
the classroom interaction is a negotiation between teachers` meanings and
students` understandings; it is a sort of give and take between teachers and
students as they construct shared understandings.
21
Moreover, Sharma and Sharma (1996:37) stated that classroom interaction
is the interaction between a projector entity called teacher and receptor entities
which include students as individuals in a small group and as a whole class as
well as inanimate objects with which the teacher interacts.
The direction and dimension of classroom interaction is provided by the
identification and classification of the nature of receptor entities. Its functional
dimension consists of the following three tasks:
1- Communication: Communication of subject-matter or content
comprising facts, names and concepts that deal with the fields of
organized knowledge.
2- Inter-personal relation: Establishing and maintaining inter- personal
relations among people within the classroom.
3- Learning: Facilitation of the learning process.
While, Walklin (2000:164) indicated that interaction means communication.
It is the art of successfully sharing meaningful information with people by
means of an interchange of experience. The important word is "successfully",
which implies that a desired behaviour change results when the receiver takes
in the message.
In a teaching situation, the teacher could transmit information for the whole
period, but there is no guarantee that information will have been received by
the students. The teacher needs to be able to assess problems of understanding,
embarrassment and confusion in students.
22
Furthermore, Metelo (n. d.) defined the classroom interaction as ".. the
process in which teachers and students have a reciprocal effect upon each other
through which they say and do in the classroom."
Characteristics of an Interactive Classroom
1- Shared Knowledge among Teachers and Students
In traditional classrooms, the dominant metaphor for teaching is the
teacher as information giver; knowledge flows only one way from teacher to
students. In contrast, the metaphor for interactive classroom is shared
knowledge. The teacher has vital knowledge about content, skills, and
instruction, and still provides that information to students. However, interactive
teachers also value and build upon the knowledge, personal experiences, and
culture that students bring to the learning situation.
Moreover, when students see that their experiences and knowledge are
valued, they are motivated to listen and learn new ways, and they are more
likely to make more important connections between their own learning and
school learning (Tinzmann & et. al , 1990).
2- Shared Authority among Teachers and Students
In interactive classrooms, teachers share authority with students in very
specific ways. In most traditional classrooms, the teacher is largely, if not
exclusively, responsible for setting goals, designing learning tasks and
23
assessing what is learned. Interactive teachers differ in that they provide
options for activities and assignments that capture different student interests,
and encourage students to assess what they learn. The point here is twofold: (1)
students have opportunities to ask and investigate questions of personal
interest, and (2) they have a voice in the decision-making process (Tinzmann &
et.al., 1990 ).
3- Providing " Whole-Task Practice":
In interactive foreign language learning, teachers provide learners with
opportunity to work in pairs, groups, individuals, and whole class in the
classroom through various kinds of interactive activity in order to suit the
learners` level of ability ( Littlewood, 1995:17).
4- Creating a Content Which Supports Learning
Interactive activity provides opportunities for positive personal
relationships to develop among learners and between learners and teacher.
These relationships can help to " humanize" the classroom and to create an
environment that supports the individuals in their efforts to learn
(Slavin,1995:51).
Thus, these characteristics of an interactive classroom necessitate new roles for
teachers and students that lead to interactions which differ from those in more
traditional classrooms.
24
The Teacher’s Role in an Interactive Classroom:
In interactive classrooms, the teacher is no longer a dominant figure
continuously controlling and guiding the students. Rather the teacher takes one
step back and lets the students take over the activities, making up their own
conversations in pairs and groups, and learning language by doing. A key
difference is that the students are not required to produce substantially errorless
speech in native terms. This is not to say that mistakes are unimportant, but
rather that free expression is more important. So, while the teacher provides
some feedback and correction, this plays a much less central part in his or her
classroom duties (Cook, 1991:140).
In interactive classrooms, the teacher has different roles:
The teacher as a facilitator
Facilitating involves creating rich environments and activities for linking
new information to prior knowledge, providing opportunities for interaction
and offering students various learning activities (Walklin, 2000:245).
The teacher as a monitor
25
To establish an interactive learning structure, the teacher must observe and
intervene as needed to assist the learners in acquiring their groups` goal. The
teacher’s most frequent monitoring functions will be telling students where to
find needed information, repeating how to complete the task, exhibiting the
form of the product to be produced ( in whole or part) , and modeling for a
group the process to be used in achieving the group goal.
Via monitoring, the teacher is like the skilful conductor of an orchestra,
giving each of the performers a chance to participate (Cajkler & Addelman,
1992:19).
The teacher as a motivator
It is important to motivate the students, to arouse their interest and involve
them in what they are doing. Some key factors will motivate the learners such
as the teacher’s own performance, mastery of teaching skills, careful
preparation; selection and presentation of topics and activities, and the
teacher’s own personality, which in language teaching must be flexible enough
to allow the teacher to be authoritative and friendly at the same time (Borich,
2004:329).
The Learner’s Role in an Interactive Classroom
The learner has different roles in the interactive classroom:
1- The learner as recipient of information: In this role, the learner
generally listens or reads and takes notes.
26
2- The learner as a participant: A learner can participate in all
interaction opportunities, and group activities.
3- The learner as a group leader: In group activities, there is a leader
for each group.
4- The learner as a group reporter: A reporter can take notes on the
discussion, either for a record of what was discussed or for reporting
back to a larger group ( Richards & Lockhart, 1997:104).
Inside the classroom, some learners seem to take advantage of what is
going on more than others. It looks as if they are more engaged with the
process of learning than their colleagues. Those students possess some or all of
the following characteristics:
- A willingness to listen: Good learners listen to what is going on- not
just in the sense of paying attention, but also in terms of really listening
to the English that is being used.
- A willingness to experiment: Many good learners are not afraid to
"have a go" They are prepared to take risks, to try things out and see
how it works.
- A willingness to accept correction: Good learners are prepared to be
corrected if it helps them. They are keen to get feedback from the
teacher and act upon what they are told. But this only works where
teachers are able to offer constructive criticism rather than castigating
them for being wrong.
27
If these are good learner qualities, then it is part of a teacher`s job to
encourage them by creating an atmosphere which shows students that their
experimentation and questions are welcome (Harmer, 1998: 10-12).
Thus, these individual differences in learners` personalities and cognitive styles
lead to different patterns of interaction.
Learner’s Interactional Patterns
Richards and Lockhart (1997:145-146) described six different learner’s
interactional patterns:
1- Task-oriented students: These students are generally highly
competent and successful in completing academic task. They enter into
learning task actively and generally complete tasks with a high degree
of accuracy.
2- Phantom students: These students may not often be noticed or heard
in the classroom, although they are generally good students who work
steadily classroom tasks. However, they participate actively in lessons
only infrequently, and rarely initiate conversation or ask for help.
3- Social students: These students place a high value on personal
interaction. They participate actively in the lesson, although their
28
answers may not always be correct. They tend to be popular with their
classmates.
4- Dependent students: These students need the teacher’s support and
guidance to complete class tasks. They often depend on the teacher or
other students to tell them if their learning has been successful and if
not, how to remedy the problem.
5- Isolated students: These students set themselves a part from others
and withdraw from classroom interactions. They may avoid learning
situations by turning away from activities such as peer or group work.
6- Alienated students: These students react against teaching and
`learning, and are often hostile and aggressive. They create discipline
problems. They require close supervision, and their learning problems
are often related to personal problems.
Classroom Climate
There are two related aspects of an effective classroom climate: the social
environment, meaning the interaction patterns teachers promote in the
classroom, and the organizational environment, meaning classroom
arrangement ( Borich, 2004:355).
The Social Environment:
29
It refers to the atmosphere or mood in which interactions between teacher
and students take place. It is created by the manner and degree to which
teachers exercise authority, show warmth and support, encourage
competitiveness or cooperation, and allow for independent judgment and
choice. ( Kyriacou, 1998:65)
The Organizational Environment:
Doff (1995:137-140) pointed that most teachers use the following learning
arrangements depending on the kind of lesson they are teaching, though
teachers use some more frequently than others.
1- Whole-class teaching: Whole-class instructional methods are the most
commonly used in public school teaching, particularly for the beginning
of the lesson.
2- Individual work: It is generally the second most frequently used
teaching pattern in classrooms. It includes such activities as completing
work sheets, reading a comprehension passage and answering
questions, doing exercises from a text or workbook, and composition
and essay writing.
3- Pair work: The teacher divides the whole class into pairs. Every
student works with his or her partner, all the pairs work at the same
time.
30
4- Group work: The teacher divides the class into small groups to work
together (usually four or five students in each group). All the groups
work at the same time.
Motivation
Motivation is a word used to describe what energizes or directs a learner`s
attention, emotions, and activity. It often can account for why one student
spends class time writing a love note, while another eagerly attends to the
lesson ( Borich, 2004:344).
Motivators are things that influence learners to choose one activity over
another. Motivators can be internal, coming from within the individual, such as
a tendency to be aggressive. Motivators are also external, coming from the
environment. (Lumsden, 1994)
To motivate in positive ways, the teacher must know the learners` internal
motivators, such as their interests, attitudes, and aspirations. Teacher also must
know the external motivators in classroom, such as peer-group influences, the
physical arrangement of the classroom, and classroom rules. The key to
motivating students is bringing these internal and external sources of
motivation together to actively engage the students in learning (Ibid).
Arends (1991:108-109) indicated that motivated students tended to spend
more time working outside class ( doing homework, for example) and to
participate more actively in class as well. The extent of learners` participation
in class seems to depend also on the type of motivation.
31
In addition, it sounds necessary to shed the light on a number of topics that
commonly deal with classroom interaction: feedback, self- esteem, and
reinforcement.
Feedback is communication to a person which gives him information
about some aspect of his behaviour and its effect on him. It is one of the major
sources of information by which we can know how we are perceived by others;
develop clarity about what our relationships are; what they are; and decide
what changes; if any, we want to make in our behaviour so as to improve the
quality of relationships or situations. Effective feedback helps teachers know
whether their behaviors are having the effect that they want and it tells them
whether they are "on target" as they strive to achieve their goals. (Dinana, n. d.)
Nunan (1995:195) indicated that positive feedback is much more effective than
negative feedback in changing pupil behavior. Positive feedback has two
principal functions: to let students know that they have performed correctly,
and to increase motivation through praise.
Gower (1995:163) stated that giving positive feedback leads to:
- successful communication – where students have expressed themselves
clearly and been understood by others.
- accurate use of grammar points recently learned.
- good use of new vocabulary.
- good pronunciation – expressive intonation.
- good use of colloquial expressions in conversation.
32
- good use of fluency strategies in conversation.
Also, Appel and Muysken (1988:92) stated that the learners` attitudes towards
the target language community are believed to affect his success in learning
considerably because the motivation to learn the second language is determined
by learners` attitudes.
Moreover, Kyriacou (1998: 84) reported that pupils` self-esteem is one of the
most important features that have contributed to improving the quality of
education provided in schools. The need to foster pupils` self-esteem is
fundamental to establishing a positive classroom climate, and the most
important influence on pupils` self–esteem in the classroom is teacher`s
interaction with the pupils. If teacher`s comments to pupil are largely positive,
supportive, encouraging, praising, valuing and relaxing, rather than negative,
deprecating, attacking, dominating and anxiety- provoking, this will do much
to foster pupils` self-esteem.
Allwright and Bailey (1994:182) indicated that positive reinforcement will
enhance self-esteem, and that will probably lead to better performance on
future tasks.
Mamidi and Ravishankar (1998:206) reported that the more quickly
reinforcement follows the desired performance, the more likely it is that the
behavior of a pupil can be developed or shaped by differential reinforcement.
33
Section II
Review of related literature of Classroom Interaction
Classroom-interaction has been one of the topics that have captured the interest
of researchers in the world. Researchers have dealt with this topic from
different aspects. Some of the studies have drawn the attention to the
importance of stimulating the classroom interaction. Others have investigated
the factors affecting classroom-interaction.
Here in this study, the researcher provides the related literature into two
parts: ( 1 ) the importance of classroom interaction, and ( 2 )factors affecting
classroom interaction.
The Importance of Classroom Interaction:
34
Seliger (1983) studied learners` interaction in the classroom. The
students have been ranked according to the total number of interactions and
type of interactions. Three of the highest interaction generators (HIG) and
three of the lowest interaction generators (LIG) have been selected to sit for
an oral comprehension exam.
The results of the study indicated that learners who initiated interaction
were better able to turn input into intake. The increased intake had an effect
on the rate of second language development as shown by the learners`
improvement of their test scores. Also, the researcher found that HIGs
produced more language than did LIGs.
Higgs (1995) tested the hypothesis that students` evaluation of
pedagogical method was modified by their learning style. The results
indicated that students who actively participated in classroom discussions
rated interactive teaching components such as voluntary group study
sessions as very important to their learning, while students with low verbal
participation scores rated less interactive components such as lectures or
texts to be more valuable. Interviews with students indicated that student
felt the use of different teaching methods provided a more interesting and
stimulating learning experience.
Crystal and Johnson (1996:235) pointed out that group work is "Potentially
dynamic" since it encourages students to share ideas and exchange
information via interaction. Therefore, such a technique is so sufficient as it
35
generates an interactive language by which students can develop their oral
skills. In other words, group work motivates students to speak freely,
express ideas, and explain things.
Naqeeb (1997) investigated the effect of role-play on developing the
speaking proficiency of eighth grade students in Nablus. The sample
consisted of (60) students and was divided randomly into two groups; an
experimental group and control one. An oral interview test was used as a
tool of the study. The results revealed that the experimental group
developed significantly after the implementation of role-play.
Hayes (1998: 80-81) stated that pupil discussion in groups is worthwhile for a
number of reasons, including:
- It allows pupils to engage with the subject in hand.
- It obliges pupils to think for themselves.
- It offers an opportunity for pupils to express their own ideas publicly.
- It gives pupils access to other people's ideas and understanding.
- It helps students to recognize that there are valid opinions more than
their own.
- It brings members of a group closer together.
Group discussions have become increasingly accepted as an important part
of the learning process.
36
Linton (1998) investigated the ways that enhance and extend learning within a
particularly difficult primary year six classes. This study focused on how
behavior was affected when students were actively involved in their own
learning through designing and making activities requiring a problem solving
approach. This study was based on observations of students and analysis of
some of their work.
The results of the study showed that the behavior of all the students was
notably improved during this activity-motivation for their work that students
worked with enthusiasm. Through this method of learning, there were also
many opportunities for students to practise and develop more academic skills,
e. g. speaking, listening and writing in English.
Dougan (1999) prepared a peer-promoted social program that was introduced
to two teachers in a local pre-school program. The first teacher was given
continuing classroom consultation and training directly addressing the use of
social skills program. The second teacher was given an equivalent amount of
consultation, but no consultant-initiated efforts were made to support the use of
the program.
The results indicated that significant improvement in standardized
measures of social skills and observed levels of associative behavior were
found only in the skill-specific consultation classroom. The data suggested that
reinforcing the students for appropriate social interactions was not sufficient.
Rather, peer-support and consultation must be available for the teacher to
produce significant changes in the students` behavior.
37
Goldberg (2001) aimed at increasing high school and middle school students`
motivation for doing well in school. Analysis of probable cause data indicated
that many students did not interact in class regularly, but rather came to school
to socialize.
The results showed that students with poor motivation were often bored in
school and had poor relations with their teachers. Cooperative learning was
chosen as the best strategy to improve students` motivation. It was noted that
students became less dependent on teacher assistance and more cooperative
with each other.
Knight (2002) focused on the student-student interactions that occurred in the
second university-level (ESL) English second language classrooms, and the
helping behaviors they presented. The researcher observed the classes as a
passive observer.
The findings showed that student learning did result from student-student
interactions that contained helping behaviors that ESL students use to help
each other while they were in class.
Ibrahim & Hassaballah (2002:77) summarized the importance of classroom
interaction in these points:
1- It helps teachers to develop their teaching methods, by providing them
information about their teaching behavior inside the class, and the
favorable behavior.
38
2- It increases students` motivation towards learning situations. It
encourages students to discuss and exchange their opinions.
3- It helps students to acquire positive attitudes towards the teacher, the
curricula and towards their colleagues.
4- It improves the level of students` achievement and strengthens their
learning when they explain some points to the other students.
Rhodes (2002) investigated teaching and learning inside a middle school
via analysis of classroom events and activities, student interactions, and the
overall role of the teacher. Data were collected via videotape, interviews,
document analysis, and field notes, student-teacher interactions were coded
according to Levin`s model for cluster behavior of students in the
classroom. The model included coding procedures for analyzing student
and teacher interactions. The overall purpose of the study was to extract
themes and common points from the data.
Firstly, the study showed evidence of whole-class teaching,
individualized teaching, small group teaching, peer-based teaching, and
media-based teaching. Secondly, the study showed evidence of student-
student, student-teacher, and student-material interactions. Thirdly, the role
of the teacher was identified as an evaluator, technician/facilitator,
instructor, and disciplinarian.
Using a variety of grouping configurations also facilitates learning in a couple
of ways. One, the variety of groups helps to maintain students` interest. It is
39
difficult for some students to stay focused when the classroom is always set up
the same way with the teacher talking to the whole class or having students
work individually on their own. Moving from a whole group to cooperative
groups or partners adds variety to the learning situation and increases student
involvement in the learning process.
Second, varying grouping structures increases the chance that a student`s
preferred mode of instruction will be matched .For instance, some students
work best with a partner, getting somewhat distracted in a large group. Other
students are stimulated by the many perspectives shared in a large group and
do well in that setting ( Echevarria, 2004:104).
Factors Affecting Classroom Interaction
English language learners benefit from structured opportunities to use
English language in multiple settings and across content areas. For students
learning English, teachers must create multiple and varied opportunities to
engage in meaningful interactions in the target language ( English), not simply
social uses of language. And the language must be meaningful to students; it is
not just the quantity of exposure to English that affects learning, but it is the
quality as well (Hall, 2000: 293-294).
Here, the researcher reviews the related literature to the factors affecting
classroom interaction into three sections: (a) factors affecting classroom
interaction related to the teacher's performance, (b) factors affecting classroom-
interaction related to the student's performance, and (c) factors affecting
English classroom interaction related to the textbook.
40
a- Factors Affecting Classroom-Interaction Related to
the Teacher's Performance:
The second Education Commission (as cited in Kochhar 1997:152-153)
pointed out that, " Every teacher and educationist of experience know that even
the best curriculum and the most perfect syllabus remain dead unless
quickened into life by right methods of teaching and right kind of teachers".
Also, a conqueror of the stature of Alexander the Great said, " I owe my birth
to my father, but life to my teacher."
The teacher plays an important role in shaping the habits, manners, and
above all the character of students. Also, the opportunities for interaction that
teachers make available must ensure that not only the cognitive but the
affective dimensions are considered (Dandekar, 1998: 520).
Establishing valuable patterns of verbal interaction in classrooms does not
happen by chance. It is the teachers` task to put speakers at their ease before
they can be expected to talk with confidence. If the teacher is only " half"
listening or gets impatient with pupils` attempts to verbalize their thinking,
sensitive pupils lose the incentive to project their voices and lapse into a few
stuttering words that fail to convey what they intended. The embarrassed
individual is unlikely to venture making another contribution for some time.
Teachers are more likely to establish and promote effective verbal
interaction if they convince pupils that they are interested in their individual
welfare, modeled through:
41
- giving them the chance to speak;
- listening intently to what they say;
- acknowledging their feelings, beliefs and preferences;
- allowing time for them to disclose matters of significance;
- speaking and acting courteously towards them;
- responding openly but considerately to the points they raise;
- avoiding favouritism and unfairness;
- insisting on a high standard of mutual respect from pupils.
(Hayes,1998:80-81)
Similarly, Echevarria (2004: 90-95) reported that learning is more effective
when students have an opportunity to participate fully in lessons by discussing
ideas and information. Students benefit from using the target language (
English) and practicing expression of their ideas, opinions, and answers in
English. Effective teachers structure their lessons in ways that promote student
discussion and they also encourage elaborated responses from students when
discussing the lesson's concepts.
They elicit more extended student contributions by using a variety of
techniques that will take students beyond simple yes or no answers and short
phrases. Some of these techniques include asking students to expand on their
answers by saying, " Tell me more about that .."; and by asking direct
questions to promote more language use such as, " what do you mean by.." or "
what else..". Another technique is to provide further information through
questions such as " How do you know?", "what does that remind you of?" .
42
Other techniques include offering restatements such as " In other words..", "Is
that accurate?" and by frequently pausing to let students process the language
and formulate their responses. Some teachers often call on other students to
extend a classmate's response.
Oller and Richard (1983: 242-245) reported that sociodrama is a type of role
play involving series of student enactments of solutions to social problem. It
promotes the development of the social strategies such as initiating interaction
with others, establishing and maintaining relationships, and counting on others
for help.
Teachers may use sociodrama to elicit communication from all students,
since sociodrama creates a relaxed atmosphere, one in which even shy students
feels free to participate.
The teacher endeavors to foster a comfortable environment by: (1) calling
on native speakers or the most verbal and socially accepted students to
participate in early enactments; (2) not criticizing students; (3) not forcing
students to participate against their will; (4) giving shy students passive roles at
first to get them used to being in front of the class.
As a consequence of these procedures, students are given practice and
security in performing before others.
Furthermore, teachers pay attention to their use of questions and alternative
conversational tactics to recitation. These alternatives to teachers` questions,
which include telling, suggesting, negotiating and listening were designed to
43
free pupils to give their own views, to reveal their knowledge and areas of
uncertainty, and to seek information and explanation through questions of their
own. This would involve a genuine attempt to explore the knowledge of these
forms in the second or foreign language, and to promote a real discussion.
(Ackers& Hardman ,2001:259)
Likely, Long and Richards (1987:326) have reported that the frequency of
teacher`s questions improves the quantity and quality of students` talk.
Also, Aggarwal (1995:407) concluded that the success of a teacher in the class
depends on the art of questioning. One who questions faultlessly, teaches
effectively. With the help of the right type of questions and a wise teacher, we
can lead students from dark and unknown regions to known and bright ones.
Another issue relevant to the management of learning concerns the distribution
of questions. Good and Brophy (1987:190) pointed out that teachers should
distribute questions among all students rather than restricting them to a select
few. By distributing response opportunities widely, all learners are kept alert
and given an opportunity to respond.
There has been considerable research on the length of time teachers wait after
asking a question. It is important for students to have sufficient time to think
about questions after they have been asked before attempting to answer them.
Rowe (1986) finds that teachers waited less than a second before calling on a
44
student to respond, and that only a further second was then allowed for the
student to answer before the teachers intervened, either supplying the required
response themselves, rephrasing the question, or calling on some other student
to respond.
He added that in those classrooms where teachers did manage to extend
their wait time from three to five seconds after asking a question, there was
more participation by more students. In particular, the following effects were
observed:
- There was an increase in the average length of student's responses.
- Unsolicited, but appropriate, student responses increased.
- Failures to respond decreased.
- Inferential statements increased.
- Student-initiated questions increased.
- Students generally made a greater variety of verbal contributions to the
lesson.
Effective teachers consciously allow students to express their thoughts
fully, without interruption. They provide sufficient wait time for English
language learners; they also work to find a balance between wait time and
moving a lesson a long.
In a related direction, Orlich & et al.(1994:195 -198) have reported that the
nonverbal message (pause) communicates that any student in the class may be
selected for a response. When a question is asked and then followed by a short
pause, all students will attend to the communication. Thus, the attention level
45
of the class remains high. If you reverse this pattern by calling on a particular
student before you ask the question, then all these students who are not
involved have the opportunity " not to attend" to the communication between
teacher and student.
Moreover, a pause after the question also provides you with a little time to
read the nonverbal cues from the class. With some practice you can readily
observe such nonverbal signals as pleasure, apprehension, fright, excitement,
joy, or shame.
As teachers become more affectivel0001451 sensitive to humanistic
considerations in the classroom, this dimension of teaching becomes very
important.
Flanders as cited in (Sadker & Sadker, 1991:220) developed an instrument
called Flanders Interaction Analysis. As a result of applying this interaction
analysis instrument in classrooms involving 147 teachers, Flanders found that
the teacher was talking during two-thirds of the classroom time. Two-thirds of
teacher`s talk was what Flanders called direct talk" and included lecturing and
giving directions.
Flanders suggested that this two-thirds pattern had unfortunate
consequences in that students were forced into a passive role that resulted in
negative attitudes, lower achievement, and a general dependency on the
teacher.
46
Bellack used a game analogy to describe classroom language patterns. He
determines that the language game was composed of the following cycles:
1- Structuring ( or setting up the dialogue)
2- Soliciting ( or questioning)
3- Responding (answering the questions)
4- Reacting (commenting on the accuracy and quality of the response)
Bellack found that teachers were responsible for most moves in the
language game, they structured, solicited, and reacted. In contrast, students`
participation in this game of language was typically confined to responding to
teachers` questions.
He, also found that teachers initiated about 85 percent of these verbal
cycles and that they spoke approximately three times as many lines of dialogue
as did students. Therefore, students were relegated to the passive role of
responding to questions (as cited in Sadker & Sadker, 1991:224).
Consolo (2000: 92) pointed out that the quality of teachers` classroom
language could contribute to language development, in as much as it fostered
regular patterns of classroom discourse. Another assumption was that teachers`
competence in the target language was a requirement for the "quality" of
teachers` management of classroom-discourse.
Duff (2000:111) stated that frequent repetition of target structures is a means of
helping learners develop good language learning " habits", these drills are led
by teachers or an audio taped stimulus to which students would respond to a
47
cue. Repetition signals not only that one is engaged in discussion with others,
but it also indexes a history of interactions with one`s interlocutors. He
reported that:
Repeating the words, phrases, or sentences of other speakers (a) accomplishes a conversation, (b) shows one`s response to another`s utterance, ( C) shows acceptance of others` utterances, their participation, and them, and (d) gives evidence of one`s own participation.
Shipman (1990:70) pointed out that learning was increased where work was
planned and delivered by teachers who kept up the momentum, interacted with
pupils and kept them alert by questioning.
Adams and Hamm (1994:44) pointed out that the teacher acts as the students`
pilot, selecting meaningful topics for discussion, mapping out opportunities for
collaboration, and observing the interaction of the working groups in which
students make connections between new ideas discussed in class and prior
knowledge.
A study by El-sakran and Ankit (1995) aimed at investigating how Arab
students interrupt lectures in lecture-rooms. A hundred students were randomly
chosen and used as subjects for the study. The findings showed that the
majority of subjects used unacceptable strategies of turn-taking in classroom-
interaction without realizing that this made them sound " rude and impolite".
The results obtained suggested that students interrupted to ask for
repetition, clarification, or to express their disagreement in a more relevant
manner, especially when they were introduced to the varied structures, used for
48
such purposes and they were about their degrees of appropriacy to the
situations in which they may be utilized.
Nystrand (2001) advocated that teachers pay more attention to the way in
which they evaluate pupils` responses, so that there is more high level
evaluation whereby teachers incorporate pupils` answers into subsequent
questions. Therefore when high-level evaluation occurs, the teacher ratifies the
importance of a pupil's response and allows it to modify or affect the course of
the discussion. This will encourage more pupil-initiated ideas and responses.
Al-Gussain`s study (2001) aimed at investigating English oral communication
and specified necessary techniques that should be applied by English language
teachers in order to achieve effective English oral communication.
The sample consisted of 3o teachers from the whole population of "tenth
level" teachers in Gaza. The researcher applied two valid and reliable tools: a
questionnaire and an observation card. To treat the results, the percentage score
was used for describing and specifying the techniques used by teachers, T-test
for gender and qualification variables and One Way ANOVA for the
experience variable.
Results showed that teachers with educational background apply English
oral communication techniques more than English teachers who graduated
from faculties of arts. Moreover, results of the observation card indicated that
neither male nor female teachers use the necessary techniques for teaching oral
communication.
49
Lopez (1995) investigated the relationship between classroom student diversity
(how students differ in their attributes, educational requirements, learning
style) and teacher capacity (skills, abilities, knowledge) to student performance
in Texas public university.
The teacher`s ethnicity and gender, class size, and classroom per pupil
expenditure were explored to determine what classroom student diversity /
teacher capacity combinations could be suggested to maximize overall
classroom student's performance.
Results indicated that: (1) no differences in classroom student performance
exist between teachers with bachelors degrees and teachers with masters
degrees; (2) teacher classroom experience is the most important source of
teacher's capacity; (3) students are systematically assigned to classrooms based
on a teacher's tenure, e.g., novice teachers get harder classroom student
assignments while more experienced teachers receive easier assignments.
Another study by Omving (1989) aimed at examining teacher-student
interaction in Kentucky`s secondary and post-secondary vocational education
classrooms. He has investigated whether sex bias or inequities were present
and what might explain such differences.
Results indicated that teacher gender did not appear to affect interaction.
The only teacher characteristic that was related to interaction with students was
previous training in classroom interaction strategies.
50
On the other hand, there are serious affective factors affecting English
classroom interaction related to the teacher performance. Thus, it sounds
necessary to shed the light on such influences.
Berman (1997:136-137) in a study of experiments in democracy in
elementary classrooms, has reported that those classrooms where teacher`s
explicitly helped students to develop a sense of community and positive social
relations were more successful than classrooms that simply stressed self-
governmental. He said:
A healthy democracy means social community as well as self-government … Through cooperative relationships; students begin to feel connected to others, to develop a sense of membership in the class, and morality of concern for the good of the group. The awareness dawns slowly, that every individual has responsibility to the group, just as the group responsibility to every individual.
Nashwan (1993) stated that the social atmosphere inside the classroom
affected the classroom interaction. He has described that the classroom
interaction process is similar to the interaction among the elements in the
chemical science which interact in the suitable circumstances. Also, interaction
between teacher- student, student- teacher and student-student take place in a
healthy social atmosphere.
The researcher added that when positive interaction occurs teachers have
positive attitudes towards their students and their work.
Boural (1991:147) found that the teacher should be able to arouse the sleepy,
drowsy, extrovert, introvert, optimum alertness and over active students. He
listed some factors that can arouse a student. These are:
51
1- Variations: in stimulation in the learning situations.
2- Auditory stimulation: it implies that opportunities for questions and
discussion should be provided to the students.
3- Visual illustrations: they have an arousing effect. Human vision has an
orientating reflex towards movement.
4- Novel stimulation: means that a sudden lowering of a lecturer`s voice
can emphasize a point because it attracts attention.
5- Motivation: motivated students work longer, rather than more
intensively.
Brophy (1996) surveyed effective teachers to find out how they responded to
shy students. The most commonly mentioned responses included: (1) changing
the social environment (e.g. seating them among friendly classmates or
assigning them to a partner or small group), (2) encouraging or shaping
increased responsiveness, (3) minimizing stress or embarrassment, (4)
engaging shy students in special activities, and (5) involving them frequently in
small-group, cooperative interaction with peers.
Dandekar (1998: 467-468) pointed out that there are few requisites on the part
of a teacher to create an environmental conducive to interaction in the class:
1- The teacher should consider each pupil as valuable and appreciate what
is best in him,
2- The teacher should be enthusiastic about the activities she/he conducts
in the class,
52
3- The teacher must know the interrelationships between the pupils and
avoid compulsions in the matters, such as setting arrangements,
forming teams for work or pairs for assignments, and play groups. He
added that a teacher should let the pupils choose their own partners and
co-workers as far as possible.
Emmer & Hickman (1991:756-757) presented some correlations with
classroom process measures which indicated that low efficacy teachers were
less persistent after incorrect answers and were more likely to criticize
students, whereas high efficacy teachers were more likely to praise correct
responses.
Gebhard (1999: 52-53) indicated that an appreciation for the uniqueness of
individuals leads to genuine communicative interaction. To create a classroom
atmosphere conducive to interaction, teachers need to understand and accept
each student as he or she is which sometimes can require considerable effort.
The researcher added that another important factor is providing chances
for students to express themselves in meaningful ways. Students need chances
to listen to each other, express their ideas in speech and writing. Students need
to have choices as to what they want to say, to who they want to say it, and
how they want to say it.
Borich ( 2004: 23) stated that enthusiasm is an important aspect of a teacher
affect. Enthusiasm is the teacher`s vigor, power, involvement, excitement, and
53
interest during a classroom presentation. Enthusiasm is conveyed to students in
many ways, the most common being vocal inflection, gesture, eye contact, and
animation. A teacher`s enthusiasm is important in promoting student
engagement in the learning process.
Goldstein and Blackford (1998: 261) stated that in larger classes teachers
have less opportunity to interact with individual pupils and offer them feedback
on their work.
Prodromou (1994) stated that teacher`s position; the way a teacher moves
around the room at different points in the lesson can have a significant effect
on students` concentration.
Also, Cohen & Manion (1992:261) stated that many teachers do not fully face
their class when they teach. They hide behind desks, podiums, and tables, and
often continuously write on the blackboard with their backs to the class. Not
only does this reduce the immediacy between teachers and their classes, it also
removes any visual communication between them.
Another important issue is teachers` attitudes and expectations that a teacher
holds with respect to the student. Cohen & Manion have indicated that students
of differing achievement levels were treated differently by their teachers; and
that there were important differences in both the frequency and quality of
contacts between them. Some of the consequences were that high achievers
received more opportunities to respond than low achievers. They also tended to
54
ask more questions. Further, teachers waited significantly longer for the more
capable students to respond before giving an answer or calling on another
student.
The findings disclosed, too, that teachers praised high achievers more than
low achievers, the latter being more likely to be criticized for a wrong answer.
Teachers also tended to give up more readily with students who did not know,
or who answered incorrectly, and this suggest that they expect and demand
higher performance from high achievers (Cohen & Manion, 1992:180).
Chaube (1997:105) stated that all students should be given full and equal
opportunities.
Kara (1992: 133) stated that the attitude of the teacher influences students`
success and their continuation in the language course. A teacher has to be
creative in providing a large number of varied activities to be able to hold the
interest of these students.
Corder`s study (1999) aimed at investigating practices, attitudes, and
behaviors that experienced teachers used to motivate middle school students.
The sample consisted of 10 teachers from middle school. The teacher`s
classroom behaviors and teacher-student interactions classroom were observed.
Teachers completed interviews that asked about: their definition of motivation;
characteristic of motivated and unmotivated students.
55
Results indicated that establishing a positive teacher-student relationship
was a strong motivator. In addition, teacher`s ability to meet diverse student`s
needs was a motivating factor.
Nanda (1997:53) pointed out that a teacher who develops positive
psychological attitudes in himself and in the students improves the physical,
social and instructional environments of the classroom.
Thomson (1996: 343) stated that a teacher should know the interests of each
pupil early in the school. Instruction should begin at the point of interest of the
student.
Fassinger (1995) sought students and professors contributions to students`
silence. The sample of the study consisted of 1,069 students in a small private
college. Results indicated that class traits and student traits explained the most
variance; neither professors` gender nor professors` interpersonal style played a
central role in class-participation.
A study by Auster (1994) aimed at studying the effects of faculty members`
behavior on students` interaction. The sample of this study consisted of 132
college students. The researcher prepared a questionnaire of factors that might
affect classroom-participation.
The results of this study asserted that relationship between students and
faculty was the result of responses to a negotiated social setting.
56
Another concern is the relationship between teacher and pupils as Kyriacou
(1997: 109-110) reported that the relationship between a teacher and pupils is
of fundamental importance to effective teaching. Mutual respect is required for
a sound relationship between teacher and pupils. Respect for pupils as learners
requires setting up learning experiences in which the views and opinions of
pupils can be heard, developed, and elaborated, and in which the pupils are
given a large measure of control in shaping and carrying out learning activities.
A more active role for pupils not only makes sense in terms of effective
learning, but is extremely important in fostering pupils` self-esteem regarding
themselves as learners.
Respect for pupils as learners lies at the heart of the hidden curriculum
operating in the classroom. The interaction which takes place between teacher
and pupils during the lesson communicates respective perceptions of each
other's role. As well as the overt message of what is said, the way the teacher
responds to pupils` answers to questions.
b- Factors Affecting English Classroom Interaction
Related to the Student's Performance:
The student must assume more responsibility for the learning process.
Now, the student is not simply a passive receptacle into which the teacher
pours knowledge. He must participate actively in the learning process. It is the
learner who must assimilate the language and allow it to become part of him.
We, as teachers, can only facilitate this process. (Lopez,1994:16)
57
Richards & Nunan (1995:112-113) argued that student-student interaction may
actually be more important for educational success than teacher-student
interaction. He claimed that constructive student-student interactions influence
students` educational aspirations and achievement, develop social
competencies, and encourage taking on the perspectives of others.
They asserted that teachers must control two important aspects: namely,
how learning goals are structured and how conflicts among students are
managed. Such learning goals may be cooperative, competitive, or
individualistic; thus students may work collaboratively, compete for fun and
enjoyment, or work on their own. He proposed that cognitive conflict among
students, if managed effectively, can be highly constructive, leading to
increased students` motivation and to higher levels of cognitive development
and moral reasoning.
Chang`s study (2003) aimed at investigating classroom interaction occurring in
a class of adult ESL learners in a university based intensive English language
program (I.E.P ). This study is based on the sociocultural perspective of
language and learning, which views language learning as a process of
socialization into competent participation in socioculturally significant
language practices. Using the data collected during seven weeks, this research
investigated: (1) the functional characteristics of interactions that the
participants construct in their classroom interactions with emphasis on
teacher`s contributions that elicit students` contributions; (2) the characteristics
58
of student`s contributions in terms of lexical density and mean length of words,
their functions, and any possible change in students` interaction over time.
Results showed that the major turn-taking interaction pattern was Initiation
– Response – Follow up ( I R F ) and the students differently responded
according to the types of teacher`s utterances.
Anderman, et. al. (1998) described students as having three categories of
needs: needing a sense of competence, of relatedness to others, and of
autonomy. Competence involves understanding how to , and believing that one
can, achieve various outcomes. Relatedness involves developing satisfactory
connections to others in one`s social group. Autonomy involves initiating and
regulating one`s own actions
A study by Abdel Samie & Abdel Samie (1996) revealed that the learners in
small group discussion have unique information to stimulate significantly more
modified interactions than teacher-directed discussion. The speakers in group
discussion modified their language in order to assure that they have been
correctly understood. Moreover, the study indicated that small-group tasks
prompted learners to use greater range of language functions than teacher-
directed classroom.
Likely, Haynes (2001:53) reported that the relationships that students have
with their peers in school contribute significantly to their sense of belonging,
social importance, self-esteem, and connectedness to the learning environment.
59
There is a significance relationship between student`s peer group relationships
and self-esteem.
Ford (1990) discussed the efforts affecting engaging students through
classroom-participation. The sample of this study consisted of students in a
college-level humanities class. Three types of activities were utilized: (1)
connected to homework and attempted to focus on assigned reading; (2)
attempted to get students to focus on what was happening in the classroom on
that particular day; and (3) involved a critical thinking activity pushing
students to reflect on how the content connected with their lives.
Results indicated that the activities were generally effective in their aims
and test scores. Moreover, attendance was improved as well.
Slavin (1995:42) asserted that the importance of group goals and individual
accountability is in providing students with an incentive to help each other and
to encourage each other to put forth maximum effort.
In a similar direction, Ilola & et. al. (1995) reported that although students are
not as good as teachers in providing a correct language model and feedback,
during peer-interaction activities, students can participate more actively and
provide each other with authentic communication practice. Therefore, the lack
of target-level modeling and feedback may be considered to be an acceptable
trade-off for increasing students` participation and productivity.
60
The researcher added that students` lack of English ability may cause them
to give peers inaccurate feedback. Also, students` awareness of their lack of
knowledge about English may lead them to shy away from giving peers any
feedback at all. (Kral,1995: 6-7)
Gall & et. al. (1990: 90-91) pointed out that students participate in five kinds
of activities: (1) Answering teacher`s questions, (2) Seatwork, (3) Inquiry, (4)
Small-groups and (5) students` presentations. These activities help students to
improve their thinking, speaking and cooperative work skills.
A study by Nashwan (1989) aimed at analyzing the verbal interaction of the
teacher students in the Education Faculty in King Soud University. The
researcher selected a random sample which consisted of 50 students. He used
Flanders System (FIAC) of analyzing 47 lessons.
Results indicated that the percentage of students verbal interaction was less
than 50% in the most lessons. Also, results revealed that teachers used the
direct method in teaching and the level of students` initiating was low.
Another study by Kang (2000) aimed at studying the following: (1) Korean
students` orientations and motivations for English learning; (2) what kinds of
orientations could lead to motivations; (3) how new cognitive variables, such
as confidence and attributions, are related to students` motivations; and (4) how
gender relates to and affects students` motivation.
61
The sample of this study consisted of 234 Korean 9th graders. The
researcher used the factor analysis to extract underlying motivations, Pearson
correlation to assess the relationship among these factors, and discriminate
function analysis to examine the effects of gender.
The results indicated that integrative reasons for second language learning
were most significant; goal salience, attributions and self-confidence were the
main motivators. All orientations should be internally controllable by students
before leading to motivations. Moreover, females consistently reported higher
integrative orientations and more positive attitudes toward second language
learning.
Dempsey and Sales (1993:141) indicated that the more students get involved in
helping and assisting each other, the more precise and accurate their feedback
to each other can be. The more accountable students are to do their fair share of
the work, the more they seek out feedback on how their performance can
improve.
Qawasmi `s study (1995) aimed at discussing some problems in teaching
English conversational interaction by investigating the need for providing more
opportunities that stimulate the students to participate in actual conversational
interaction and the need for a natural comfortable atmosphere for that.
The study was descriptive and the sample consisted of (175) students from
Beir-ziet, An-Najah, Bethlehem and Hebron universities. The researcher used a
questionnaire which included items related to the available opportunities for
62
students to make conversations with each other and with native speakers in a
natural atmosphere.
The results showed that students did not have opportunities to practise
English in their daily life. The heavy reliance on the teacher in class makes it
difficult for them to give a sufficient attention to the spoken language in the
classroom or to organize meetings with native speakers outside the classroom.
Al-Ghaunami`s study (2003) aimed at developing the communicative skills of
the 11th grade learners of English in Gaza via suggesting a video program to
teach some functions of English language to the target students.
The video program was applied through an experimental study including
two equivalent groups of the 11th grade students in Shadia abu-Ghazala
Secondary School for girls. Each group included (37) students, one of them
was an experimental group that was taught the functions of language by the
suggested program while the other group was control and was taught the same
functions in the traditional method.
The students` achievement was evaluated by valid and reliable tests, a
listening test and a speaking one. T-test independent sample was used to
measure the differences in achievement between the two groups on the
listening test and the speaking one whereas T-test paired sample measured the
differences between the pre-performance of the experimental group and the
post-performance of it on both tests of listening and speaking.
Results revealed that the experimental group scored significantly higher on
the post-test of listening and speaking than the control group did. Moreover,
63
the post-performance of the experimental group was significantly higher than
the pre-performance of it on both tests of speaking and listening.
The researcher recommended that teachers of English language should try to
present the language in a natural atmosphere of social communication, and the
use of instructional films proved to be effective for that purpose.
Chang et. al (1999) tested the relationship between student`s motivation, both
extrinsic and intrinsic, and learning strategies for English as a foreign language
(EFL).
The sample of the study consisted of 46 Taiwanese undergraduate students
of advanced EFL at a public university in the United States. The researcher
applied a questionnaire of Learning strategies.
Results revealed that total learning strategies were associated with
motivational intensity, intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic
motivation was associated with cognitive learning strategies, while extrinsic
motivation was associated with memory and affective.
Another concern is that a reward has a positive effect in motivating learners for
learning. The teacher should remain cautious that the reward should not
become an end in itself but it should create learning desire in the learner.
Also, he pointed out that teacher should use punishment very sparingly
because punishment creates behavioral troubles. (Sharma & Sharma, 1996:231)
64
A study by Heyde (1979) as cited in ( Littlewood,1995: 64) revealed that a
high level of self-esteem was associated with second language proficiency.
Learners with high self-esteem were less likely to feel threatened when
communicated in a strange language or in an unfamiliar situation.
Learners` beliefs are influenced by the social context of learning and can
influence both attitudes towards the language itself as well as towards language
learning in general. Moreover, learners` beliefs can influence learners`
motivation to learn and their expectations about language learning.( Richards
& Lockhart,1997: 52)
Howard and Henney (1998) investigated the level of classroom-interaction at a
large state university. The researcher examined students` participation level
through observations, surveys and interviews.
Results showed that attendance, students` age, course level and time of day
were significant predictors of students` interaction levels. Moreover, the impact
of student`s gender and instructor`s gender was mixed.
Bartscher (1995) designed a program for increasing student`s motivation as
demonstrated by a higher percentage of completed homework and maximum
voluntary class-participation.
The target population consisted of third, sixth, and tenth grade students
from low to middle income families located in northern Illinois. The problem
65
of low motivation was documented by student surveys, teacher journal entries,
and homework checklists.
The results indicated that the possible causes of low motivation may be the
limited educational background of parents, differing cultural values, and lack
of parental support and involvement.
Suggested solution strategies emphasized cooperative work involving
personal choice as a motivational tool.
Clifton (1997) prepared a social psychological model to examine the
educational attainment and expectations of 569 male and female education
students enrolled in a major university in Western Canada. Structural equation
modeling was used to examine the effects of gender on six social psychological
variables (positive effect, negative effect, interaction with students, interaction
with professors, motivation and self-concept of ability ) and the effects of
gender and the social psychological variables on the students` grade point
average and educational expectations. Results indicated that females had
higher positive effect.
Looker (1997) used longitudinal data from a survey of youth in three areas (
Hmilton, Halifax and rural Nova Scotia) to examine the factors that affect
young adults` participation in post-secondary education.
Data were collected from 1,200 youth in 1989, with questionnaire follow-
ups in 1992 and 1994. The researcher analyzed the factors that youth
themselves said affect their educational decisions.
66
Results indicated that students` knowledge of and attitudes to school are
considered as major factors.
Deskeyrel (2000) worked at improving students` motivation in order to
increase academic performance among eighth graders in an urban community.
The researcher used a questionnaire to measure students` motivation. Four
major interventions were implemented: The requirement of an assignment
notebook, increased parental awareness through academic progress reports,
implementation of motivationally oriented content, and development of
students` organization and study skills. In addition, a variety of cooperative
learning and social skill activities were incorporated.
The findings indicated an overall improvement in many areas, including
completion of homework, feelings about instructors, interest in class content,
and academic achievement. The incorporation of cooperative learning and
multiple intelligence lessons was found to strengthen student`s motivational
levels and academic achievement.
Pridmore`s study (2000) aimed at examining the level of student`s interaction
illustrated in case studies of school health in Nepal, Zambia, and Botswana.
This study has argued that student`s capacity for interaction was determined
not only by age and by stage of development but also by such factors as
gender, religion, ethnicity, wealth and disability. Finally, it identified strategies
for increasing the level of children`s participation through developing health-
promoting schools.
67
Moriarity`s study (2001) aimed at increasing motivation in fourth grade
students in high school. The researcher used an observation sheet to measure
the student`s interaction and interest. Three areas of intervention were
implemented: cross-curricular activities to heighten student interest,
cooperative learning strategies to promote interaction and teacher-designed
activities that focused on goal-setting and personal reflection.
The results indicated that active student interaction increased, student
attitudes toward school and learning became more positive, and students
experienced academic success by meeting personal goals.
C- Factors Affecting English Classroom Interaction according
to the Textbook:
Abu Dagga`s study (1995) aimed at studying the teachers` opinions about
the English curricula in Palestine. The sample consisted of teachers in Gaza
governorates and the West Bank.
The researcher used a valid and reliable questionnaire. The questionnaire
included items on some features of the target curricula regarding the quality of
texts, use of teachers` book, teaching materials. Also it included items on the
teachers` view of the future structure and quality of the English classes
regarding instruction age, periods per week and number of students per class.
The findings of the study indicated that the target curricula did not address
the needs of the students and they were not culturally suitable to the students,
68
also the curricula did not teach the students how to use the English language
functionally for daily life situations. The study also found that the goal of the
teaching activities was to collect facts and rules to be memorized for the exam
rather than develop the critical thinking of the students.
The classroom environment was not suitable and the classes were crowded
and not well organized.
Amer`s study (1986) aimed at investigating the state of teaching English in
Gaza Strip. The researcher analyzed many factors involved in the teaching
process such as the curricula, methods of teaching, instructional aids,
qualifications of teachers and means of assessment.
A questionnaire was used to collect the data. The study included the
secondary and preparatory stages. The findings of the study indicated that the
textbook and chalkboard were the main teaching materials, no audio-visual
aids were used, and the applied methods of teaching were the "grammar-
traditional" and the "direct methods".
Researchers stated that people learn 25 percent to 30 more when visual aids are
used in teaching, as compared to simple talking. Visual aids help in holding
attention, motivate to take action, create interest, increase permanency of
learning and make communication easier. (Dahama & Bhatnagar, 1998: 413)
Abu-Jarad`s study (1997) aimed at evaluating the availability and utilization of
teaching aids in the lower basic schools in Gaza governorates.
69
To achieve this aim, the study checked the effect of the following variables
on utilizing the teaching aids: supervision, academic qualifications, gender and
professional experience.
The research was descriptive analytic and the sample of the study consisted
of (500) male and female teachers from (42) schools, (20) of them are
governmental schools and (22) are UNRWA schools. A questionnaire of two
parts was used as a tool of study. The first part is related to the availability and
utilization of teaching aids in the schools while the second part is related to the
criteria which should be taken into consideration during the use of the teaching
aids.
The validity of the tool was checked by the specialists and Sperman-Brown
formula was used to check the reliability. To find the results, the percentage
score was used for the first part of the questionnaire while T- test was used for
the second part.
Results revealed that cheap and easy to make and use teaching aids were
more available and used than expensive and technological ones.
The study recommended the necessity of supplying the basic schools with a
variety of teaching aids as well as making in-service training courses for
teachers to develop their competencies. It also suggested that the universities
should provide highly designed courses for training the student teachers on
using the teaching aids especially modern ones.
70
A study by Barakat (1986) as cited in (Abd El-hadi, 2003:156-157) studied the
effect of learning aids on increasing the level of students` interaction, attention
and achievement.
The sample consisted of 120 students from the first three primary classes
divided into two groups: an experimental group and a control one. The
experimental group used learning aids related to the subject while the control
group used the traditional learning aids. The researcher applied Flanders
System and an achievement test.
Results showed that the level of students` achievement, interaction and
attention in the experimental group was better than the control one.
Commentary on the Previous Studies
The researcher has benefited from reviewing the former studies and
their theoretical framework and become able to define some of the research
terminology such as interaction.
Moreover, the previous studies have enriched the theoretical framework
in this research into two parts, one of them related to the effectiveness of
interaction according to Higgs (1995), Seliger (1994), Naqeeb (1997) and
Linton (1998). The other part related to the factors affecting English
classroom interaction is divided into three parts:
In the first part Ackers and Hardman (2001), Long and Richard (1987),
and Aggarwal (1995) have confirmed that teachers` talk and questions play
an important role in motivating students to interact and free them to give
71
their opinion. Other studies such as Adams and Hamm (1994) and Nystrand
(2001) shed the light on the modern role of the teacher through the
communicative activities. He should organize, promote and monitor the
learners` efforts, and encourage them to be active.
In the second part, Abdel Samie (1996), Ford (1990), Slavin (1995)
and Richard (1995) have asserted that student- student interaction and
small group discussions increase students` interaction.
In addition, Looker (1997), Clifton (1997), Kyriacou (1997), and
Haynes (2001) have examined number of social, environmental and
cognitive factors that affecting English classroom interaction such as
(teacher-student and student-student relationship and motivation)
In the third part, Abu Dagga (1995), Amer (1986) and Abu Jarad (1997)
have investigated the textbook and teaching aids influences.
The researcher has also been able to prepare the tools of the study: the
questionnaire and the observation card according to Qawasmi (1995), Kang
(2000) and Al-Ghussain (2001).
Finally the researcher has benefited a lot in selecting and determining
the sample of the study. Many of the previous studies in this research have
used the simple random sample.
None of the studies reviewed here was conducted on Palestinian School
students dealing with factors affecting English classroom interaction.
Furthermore, this study deals extensively with the main factors affecting
English classroom interaction of 11th grade students in North Gaza
Governorate.
72
Summary
In this chapter, the researcher provided a relevant review of related
literature to the importance of classroom interaction. The researcher also
presented a review of related literature and theoretical studies besides empirical
studies which were conducted to identify the main factors affecting English
classroom interaction.
73
Chapter Three
Methodology and Procedures
The aim of the current study is to identify the main factors affecting
English classroom-interaction with reference to the 11th grade students in North
Gaza Governmental schools. To achieve the aim of this study, the researcher
used different tools to collect the needed information.
This chapter explores the population of the study, the sample of the study,
the instruments, implementation and procedures, researcher design and data
analysis procedures.
1- The Population of the Study
The population of the study consists of all male and female 11th grade
English teachers and all male and female 11th grade classrooms in the
governmental schools of North Gaza Directorate of Education for the
second semester of the scholastic year 2003-2004.
The total number of 11th grade English teachers was 30 teachers and the
total number of 11th grade classrooms was 94 classrooms.
2- The Sample of the Study
To answer the questionnaire, the researcher asked all 11th grade English
teachers who were enrolled to the governmental schools of North Gaza
Directorate of Education for the second semester of the scholastic year 2003-
2004 to fill in the questionnaire. They were 30 English teachers, 17 male
teachers and 13 female teachers, and it is a small number. This fact obliged the
74
researcher to consider the population of the study as representing the sample.
(Al-Agha, 2000: 103).
To answer the observation card, the researcher used a sample that was
drawn from 11th grade classrooms in governmental schools of North Gaza
Directorate of Education for the second semester of the scholastic year 2003-
2004. They were selected randomly (simple random sample). The sample
consisted of 30 classrooms, 17 classrooms of male students and 13 classrooms
of female students.
The researcher got the lists of the teachers and students who were enrolled to
the 11th grade in North Gaza Governmental Schools from the North Gaza
Directorate of Education.
3- Variables
This study depends on three variables. These variables are:
A- Gender Variable:
It has two levels : male and female, as in table (1)
Table (1)
Sample of Classrooms Distribution according to the Gender of Students
Gender Number of
classes
Percentage
Male 17 56.6 %
Female 13 43.3 %
Total 30 100 %
75
B- Specialization Variable:
It has two levels : science and humanities, as in table (2).
Table (2)
Sample of Classrooms Distribution according to the Specialization
Specialization Number of
classes
Percentage
Science 9 30 %
Humanities 21 70 %
Total 30 100 %
C- Location of the School Variable
It has three levels: Jabalia, Beit-Lahia, and Beit-Hanoon, as in table (3)
Table (3)
Sample of Classrooms Distribution according to the
Location of the School
The location of
school
Number of
classes
Percentage
Jabalia 12 40 %
Beit-lahia 11 36 %
Beit-Hanoon 7 23 %
Total 30 100 %
76
4- Instruments of the Study
The researcher used two different tools to achieve the aim of the study: a
questionnaire and an observation card.
4.1 The Questionnaire
The researcher depended on different sources to construct the
questionnaire: books of managing classrooms, books of second language
teaching and previous studies such as Johnson (1994), Ur (1992), Richards
(1995), Richards (1997), Al-Ghussain (2001) and Mabrouk (2003).
The questionnaire was developed to identify the main factors affecting
English classroom interaction. The questionnaire consisted of 40 items
classified into three domains: the first domain included factors related to the
teacher, the second domain included factors related to the student, and the third
domain included factors related to the textbook. ( See Appendix -B-)
Reliability of the Questionnaire
A total sample of 30 English teachers participated to test the reliability of
the questionnaire. Alpha formula was used to determine the reliability of the
questionnaire as in table -4-
77
Table (4)
Alpha Correlation Coefficient of the Questionnaire Reliability
No Domains Reliability
1- 24 Factors related to the teacher 0.922
25-34 Factors related to the student 0.754
35-40 Factors related to the textbook 0.846
The total 0.841
The results of table (4) showed that the ranges of reliability of the three
domains were between 0.754 and 0.922. Brunie and Kintz (1986) stated that
whenever an instrument`s reliability value is 0.70 or above, the instrument is
considered reliable. Based on this criterion, all these values were suitable for
conducting such study.
Validity of the Questionnaire
To ensure the validity of the questionnaire, the researcher applied two types
of validity, the referee validity and internal validity.
a- Referee validity:
The questionnaire was checked by 7 juries from the universities in Gaza
Strip and the head of supervision department at North Gaza Directorate of
Education to ensure its clarity and relevance.
Ambiguous items were clarified and modified according to their suggestions.
78
b- Internal Validity:
This type of validity indicates the correlation of each item degree with the
total degree of the test; it can also indicate the correlation of each domain
degrees with the total degree of the test ( Al-Agha, 1996:121).
The internal validity coefficient was computed by using Pearson formula. The
following tables (5, 6, 7) showed the data analysis of the correlation coefficient
of each item with the domain it belongs to and with the whole degree of the
questionnaire.
Table (5)
Correlation Coefficient of the Items in the First Domain
Items Correlation with the total
degree of the questionnaire
Correlation with its
domain
1- 0.539 0.448
2- 0.506 0.558
3- 0.630 0.694
4- 0.702 0.664
5- 0.645 0.664
6- 0.646 0.620
7- 0.646 0.734
8- 0.414 0.548
9- 0.586 0.589
10- 0.648 0.699
11- 0.644 0.694
12- 0.439 0.424
79
13- 0.668 0.739
14- 0.667 0.776
15- 0.535 0.700
16- 0.650 0.728
17- 0.401 0.422
18- 0.577 0.637
19- 0.619 0.622
20- 0.728 0.806
21- 0.569 0.558
22- 0.616 0.664
23- 0.378 0.468
24- 0.395 0.498
( R ) is significant at the level (0.05) when it is ≥ 0.361
( R ) is significant at the level (0.01) when it is ≥ 0.463
80
Table (6)
Correlation Coefficient of the Items in the Second Domain
Items
Correlations with
the total degree
Correlations with
its domain
25- 0.362 0.653
26- 0.442 0.503
27- 0.411 0.505
28- 0.405 0.591
29- 0.481 0.599
30- 0.427 0.477
31- 0.518 0.774
32- 0.765 0.701
33- 0.492 0.573
34- 0.442 0.670
( R ) is significant at the level (0.05) when it is ≥ 0.361
( R ) is significant at the level (0.01) when it is ≥ 0.463
Table -7-
Correlations Coefficient of the Items in the Third Domain:
Items
Correlations with
the total degree
Correlations with
its domain
35- 0.390 0.535
36- 0.640 0.872
37- 0.664 0.727
38- 0.523 0.834
39- 0.745 0.820
40- 0.489 0.684
( R ) is significant at the level (0.05) when it is ≥ 0.361
( R ) is significant at the level (0.01) when it is ≥ 0.463
81
Table ( 8 )
Correlation Coefficient of Each Domain with the Total Degree of the
Questionnaire
No
Domains
Correlation with the
total degree of the
questionnaire
Sig.
1- Factors related to the teacher 0.939 Sig. at 0.01
2- Factors related to the student 0.685 Sig. at 0.01
3- Factors related to the textbook 0.771 Sig. at 0.01
( R ) is significant at the level (0.05) when it is ≥ 0.361
( R ) is significant at the level (0.01) when it is ≥ 0.463
The results of tables 5, 6, 7, 8 showed that the values of these items were
suitable for conducting this study.
4.2 The Observation Card:
The researcher depended on the above mentioned sources in 4.1 to
construct the observation card. ( See Appendix -C-)
The observation card was conducted for these purposes:
1- To identify the level of classroom interaction of 11th grade students at
North Gaza Governmental Schools.
2- To identify whether there are statistically significant differences at
(α ≤ 0.05) between the 11th grade students in the English classroom
interaction due to the gender of students.
3- To identify whether there are statistically significant differences at
82
(α ≤ 0.05) between the 11th grade students in the English classroom
interaction due to the specialization of students
4-To identify whether there are statistically significant differences at
(α ≤ 0.05) between the 11th grade students in the English classroom
interaction due to the location of school.
The observation card consisted of 30 items classified into two domains: the
first domain indicates the teacher's performance and the second domain
indicates the students` performance.
Validity of the Observation Card:
a- Referee validity:
The tool was checked by 7 juries from the universities in Gaza strip and the
head of supervision department at North Gaza Directorate of Education to
ensure its clarity and relevance.
Ambiguous items were clarified and modified according to their
suggestions.
b- Internal validity:
The internal consistency coefficient was computed by using Pearson
equation, the following tables (9,10) showed the data analysis of the correlation
coefficient of each item with the domain it belongs to and with the whole
degree of the observation card.
83
Table ( 9 )
Correlation Coefficient of the First Domain
Items
Correlation with the total
degree of observation card
Correlation with
its domain
1- 0.659 0.732
2- 0.536 0.556
3- 0.407 0.443
4- 0.380 0.465
5- 0.669 0.699
6- 0.586 0.515
7- 0.461 0.479
8- 0.685 0.784
9- 0.806 0.773
10- 0.651 0.690
11- 0.654 0.594
12- 0.516 0.592
13- 0.492 0.608
14- 0.690 0.670
15- 0.727 0.838
16- 0.562 0.592
17- 0.697 0.763
( R ) is significant at the level (0.05) when it is ≥ 0.361
( R ) is significant at the level (0.01) when it is ≥ 0.463
84
Table – 10 -
Correlation Coefficient of the Second Domain
No
Correlation with the total
degree of the observation
card
Correlation
with its domain
18- 0.362 0.366
19- 0.641 0.721
20- 0.610 0.690
21- 0.686 0.653
22- 0.533 0.628
23- 0.683 0.729
24- 0.689 0.733
25- 0.598 0.654
26- 0.529 0.490
27- 0.640 0.610
28- 0.532 0.557
29- 0.548 0.580
30- 0.390 0.552
( R ) is significant at the level (0.05) when it is ≥ 0.361
( R ) is significant at the level (0.01) when it is ≥ 0.463
85
Table -11-
Correlations Coefficient of Each Domain with the Total Degree of the
Observation Card
No
Domains
Correlation with the total
degree of the observation
card
Sig.
1- Teacher`s performance 0.954 Sig. at 0.01
2- Students` performance 0.921 Sig. at 0.01
( R ) is significant at the level (0.05) when it is ≥ 0.361
( R ) is significant at the level (0.01) when it is ≥ 0.463
The results of tables (9), (10), (11) showed that the values of all the items
were suitable for conducting such study.
Reliability of the Observation Card
A total number of 30 English teachers participated to test the reliability of
the tool. Alpha formula was used to determine the reliability of the tool as
in table-12-
86
Table -12-
Alpha Coefficient of the Observation Card Reliability
No Domains Reliability
1- Teacher`s performance 0.858
2- Students` performance 0.855
The results of table (12) showed that the scores of the reliability were
above 0.855. All these values were suitable for conducting such study.
In addition, the researcher asked 3 supervisors at North Gaza Directorate of
Education to observe a lesson ( The same three supervisors observed the
classes and filled in the observation cards for this study). Then, the researcher
depended on Holsti`s equation to count the reliability of the tool (Tuaima,
1987: 58).
Holsti`s Equation R = 2M
N1 + N2
(R) refers to the consistency; (M) refers to the number of the elements of tool
agreed upon by the observers; ( N1 & N2 ) refer to the elements of the tool.
The consistency was (0.90). And this is an acceptable percentage that
allows the researcher to depend on the observation results as shown in table
(13)
87
Table (13)
Holsti Equation of the Observation Card
Analyzers
Agreed
Points
Disagreed
points
The total
points
Validity
The first and the
second analyzers
27
3
30
0.90
The first and the third
analyzers
26
4
30
0.86
The second and the
third analyzers
28
2
30
0.93
The total 81 9 90 0.90
Research Methodology
The researcher adopted the descriptive approach. Descriptive approach " is
designed to obtain pertinent and precise information concerning the current
status of phenomena and, whenever possible, to draw valid general conclusions
from facts discovered" ( Koul, 1999: 432).
Procedures of the Study
To achieve the aim of the study, the researcher:
1- collected and reviewed the previous studies to avail from their
procedures, tools, results and recommendations,
2- prepared the theoretical framework through searching in the literature
reviews,
3- prepared the questionnaire and the observation sheet for the purposes of
this study,
88
4- established the validity and reliability of the tools by experts and
specialists in this field,
5- obtained information about a number of 11th grade English teachers and
students, in North Gaza, from North Gaza Directorate of Education,
6- obtained permission from the Ministry of Education in Gaza, then from
North Gaza Directorate of Education in order to carry out her study,
7- computed the collected data statistically and analyzed the results, and
8- gave recommendations and suggestions.
Statistical Analysis
In order to analyze the data, the researcher used the SPSS statistical
packages as a statistical technique. The following statistics were used:
1- Means and percentages were used to determine the main factors
affecting English classroom interaction.
2- Pearson correlation was used to compute the validity of the tools by
internal consistency. ( Afana, 1997: 58)
3- Mann-Whitney test (U) for two independent samples.
4- Kruskal Wallis test.
89
Summary
This chapter dealt with methodology and design of the study. The
researcher classified the chapter by first presenting the population distribution.
Then, the researcher presented the sample in accordance with the study
variables (gender, specialization and the location of the school). Additionally,
the researcher tested validity and reliability of the instruments used. After that,
the researcher detailed the procedures in performing the study.
90
Chapter Four
The Results of the study
This chapter aims at presenting the results of the study by answering the
research questions. The main question of the study is: " what are the main
factors affecting English classroom interaction of the 11th grade students in
North Gaza Governmental Schools?
The Following is the Answers of the Research Questions
First: The Answer of the First Question
"What are the main factors affecting English classroom interaction of the
11th grade students according to the teachers` point of view in North Gaza
Governmental Schools according to the teacher`s point of view?"
To answer the first question, means and percentages of each item,
domain and total score of the questionnaire were computed. Tables ( 14,
15, 16 & 17) show the scores of the items, domains and the total score of
the questionnaire.
For data analysis, the researcher used the following scales according to
the points of the questionnaire:
- 80% and more is very high
- 70 -79.9% is high
- 60 – 69.9% is moderate
- 50 – 59.9% is low
- Less than 50% is very low
The means and percentages of all domains were computed.
See tables (14), (15), (16) & (17)
91
Table (14)
Means and Percentages of the First Domain of the Questionnaire
( Factors related to the Teacher)
Items Means Percentage Level
1- 3.667 73.33% High
2- 3.700 74.00% High
3- 4.000 80.00% V. high
4- 4.133 82.67% V. high
5- 4.400 88.00% V. high
6- 3.767 75.33% High
7- 4.133 82.67% V. high
8- 3.867 77.33% High
9- 3.567 71.33% High
10- 3.800 76.00% High
11- 4.100 82.00% V. high
12- 3.300 66.00% Moderate
13- 3.800 76.00% High
14 3.867 77.33% High
15- 4.133 82.67% V. high
16- 3.600 72.00% High
17- 2.700 54.00% Low
18- 3.533 70.67% High
19- 3.667 73.33% High
20- 4.133 82.67% V. high
21- 3.000 60.00% Moderate
22- 3.200 64.00% Moderate
23- 1.467 29.33% V. low
24- 1.600 32.00% V. low
Results in table (14) show that factors related to the teacher affect English
classroom interaction with different degrees.
92
Table (15)
Means and Percentages of the Second Domain of the Questionnaire
( Factors related to the Students)
Items Means Percentage Level
25- 2.567 51.33% Low
26- 2.533 50.67% Low
27- 2.633 52.67% Low
28- 3.067 61.33% Moderate
29- 2.700 54.00% Low
30- 2.800 56.00% Low
31- 2.600 52.00% Low
32- 3.600 72.00% High
33- 3.700 74.00% High
34 3.167 63.33% Moderate
Results of the above table show that factors related to the students are less
effective than factors related to the teacher.
Table ( 16 )
Means and Percentages of the Third Domain of the Questionnaire
( Factors Related to the Textbook)
Items Means Percentage Level
35- 2.500 50.00% Low
36- 2.933 58.67% Low
37- 2.933 58.67% Low
38- 3.300 66.00% Moderate
39- 3.200 64.00% Moderate
40- 3.800 76.00% High
93
Results in table ( 16 ) show that factors related to the textbook affect English
classroom interaction with different degrees.
The results of these tables (14), (15) and (16) show that factors related to the
teacher are the most effective on English classroom interaction. The percentage
of this domain is about 70.94% and it is high, whereas the percentage of the
second domain which includes factors related to the students is 58.73% and it
is low, and the percentage of the third domain which includes factors related to
the textbook is 62.22% and it is moderate, as it is shown in table (17)
Table (17)
The Total Means and Percentages of the Whole Questionnaire
Items Domains Means Percentage Level
1 - 24 -A- 85.133 70.94% High
25 -34 -B- 29.367 58.73% Low
35 - 40 -C- 18.667 62.22% Moderate
To sum up, the results in tables (14), (15), (16) & (17) show that the main
factors affecting English classroom interaction of the 11th grade students
according to the English teachers` point of view in North Gaza Governmental
Schools are in the following order:
Firstly: Factors Related to the Teacher
1- Teacher encourages students to participate.
2- Teacher prepares carefully to motivate the students.
3- Teacher communicates with students in a friendly way.
4- Teacher helps students to find the answers ( by clues, gesture).
5- Teacher`s morale.
94
6- Teacher`s relationship with students.
7- Teacher`s interest in students` needs.
8- Teacher elaborates students` inquiries.
9- Teacher uses positive reinforcement; he praises students.
10- Teacher provides students opportunities to work in pair and group.
11- Teacher uses materials to help students understand the structure of
English language.
12- Teacher involves most students in the activities.
13- Teacher provides students opportunity to practise English language
skills they have learned.
14- Teacher asks frequent questions.
15- Teacher provides students frequent feedback.
16- Teacher varies drills to practise English language structures.
17- Teacher asks students about their opinions related to the subject.
18- Teacher provides students opportunities to practise conversation in
pairs.
19- Teacher tells students jokes related to the subject.
20- Teacher uses record player.
21- Teacher`s expectation of students.
22- Teacher uses audio visual aids.
23- Teacher uses O.H.P.
24- Teacher uses TV. Set. ( See table -14-)
95
Secondly, Factors Related to the Textbook:
1- The textbook is organized.
2- The textbook is interesting.
3- The textbook is suitable for schedule.
4- The textbook is sufficient to the student`s needs.
5- The textbook is suitable for student`s level.
6- The textbook is relevant to the student`s culture. (See table -16-)
Thirdly, Factors Related to the Student:
1- Students` relationship with their teacher.
2- Students` relationship with their classmates.
3- Students` morale.
4- Students use English structures in pair and group.
5- Students comment on their classmates` answers.
6- Students prepare their lessons.
7- Students` self-esteem.
8- Students` self-confidence.
9- Students` motivation towards English language.
10- Students` attitude towards English language. ( See table -15-)
96
Second: The Answer of the Second Question:
"What is the level of English classroom interaction of the 11th grade students in
North Gaza Governmental Schools?"
To answer the second question, means and percentages of each item and
domain of the observation card were computed in order to determine the level
of English classroom-interaction of the 11th grade students in North Gaza
Governmental Schools
For data analysis, the researcher used the following scales according to the
points of the observation card:
- 80% and more is very high.
- 70 -79.9% is high.
- 60 – 69.9% is moderate.
- 50 -59.9% is low.
- Less than 50% is very low.
See tables (18), (19) & (20)
97
Table (18)
Means and Percentages of the First Domain of the Observation Card
(Teacher`s Performance)
Items Means Percentage Level
1- 3.367 67.33% Moderate
2- 3.600 72.00% High
3- 3.600 72.00% High
4- 3.833 76.67% High
5- 3.500 70.00% High
6- 2.667 53.33% Low
7- 3.100 62.00% Moderate
8- 3.433 68.67% Moderate
9- 2.700 54.00% Low
10- 3.500 70.00% High
11- 3.367 67.33% Moderate
12- 2.533 50.67% Low
13- 3.200 64.00% Moderate
14- 2.900 58.00% Low
15- 4.267 85.33% V. high
16- 3.533 70.67% High
17- 3.567 71.33% High
The results in table (18) show that teacher`s performance scores high
degrees in these items (2-3-4-5-10-15-16-17), moderate degrees in ( 1-7-8-11-
13-18) and low degrees in (6-9-12-14).
98
Table (19)
Means , Percentages and Levels of the Second Domain of the Observation
Card ( Students` Performance)
Items Means Percentage Level
18- 3.000 60.00% Moderate
19- 3.600 72.00% High
20- 3.200 64.00% Moderate
21- 2.700 54.00% Low
22- 3.867 77.33% High
23- 2.667 53.33% Low
24- 2.967 59.33% Low
25- 3.500 70.00% High
26- 2.933 58.67% Low
27- 3.067 61.33% Moderate
28- 3.200 64.00% Moderate
29- 3.133 62.67% Moderate
30- 2.300 46.00% V. low
Results in table (19) show that the percentages of students` performance are
high in these items (19-22-25), moderate in (18-20-27-28-29), low in (21-23-
24-26) and very low in (30).
The results of these two tables (18 ) & (19) show that both the teacher`s
performance and students` performance score moderate degree, as it is clear in
table (20)
99
Table (20)
The Total Means, Percentages and Levels of the Observation Card
Items Domains Means Percentage Level
1 – 17 -A- 56.667 66.67% Moderate
18 – 30 -B- 40.133 61.74% Moderate
To sum up, the results of table (20) show that the level of English
classroom interaction of the 11th grade students in North Gaza Governmental
schools is moderate
Third: The Answer of the Third Question
"Are there statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05) between the 11th
grade students of English classroom interaction due to the students` gender
(female and male) in North Gaza Governmental Schools?
To answer this question, the researcher used Mann-Whitney Test in order
to compute the values of the observation card items as shown in tables (21),
(22) & (23)
100
Table (21)
Means, Z, U values and Significant level according to the Students`
Gender in the First Domain of the Observation Card ( Teacher`s
Performance)
No Sex Means U Z Sig. Sig. level
1- Male
Female
12.471
19.462
59 2.302 0.021 Sig. at 0.05
2- Male
Female
14.00
17.462
85 1.158 0.247 Non-sig.
3- Male
Female
16.059
14.769
101 0.418 0.676 Non-sig.
4- Male
Female
14.471
16.846
93 0.802 0.423 Non-sig.
5- Male
Female
11.853
20.269
48.5 2.817 0.005 Sig. at 0.01
6- Male
Female
10.353
22.231
23 3.860 0.000 Sig. at 0.01
7- Male
Female
12.235
19.769
55 2.605 0.009 Sig. at 0.01
8- Male
Female
14.529
16.769
94 0.724 0.469 Non- sig.
9- Male
Female
11.794
20.346
47.5 2.734 0.006 Sig. at 0.01
10- Male
Female
13.853
17.654
82.5 1.301 0.193 Non-sig.
11- Male
Female
13.824
17.692
82 1.341 0.180 Non- sig.
12- Male
Female
15.794
15.115
105.5 0.222 0.824 Non-Sig.
101
13- Male
Female
13.941
17.538
84 1.216 0.224 Non-sig.
14- Male
Female
14.412
16.923
92 0.881 0.378 Non- Sig.
15- Male
Female
13.206
18.500
71.5 1.788 0.074 Non-sig.
16- Male
Female
12.618
19.269
61.5 2.242 0.025 Sig. at 0.05
17- Male
Female
14.235
17.154
89 0.939 0.348 Non-sig.
Results of the above table show that computed Mann-Whitney Test values
of the items indicate that the teacher`s performance is significant in these items
(1-5-6-7-9-16) in the favor of female.
Table ( 22 )
Means, Z, U values and Sig. level due to the Students` Gender of the
Second Domain of the Observation Card "Students` Performance"
No Sex Mean U Z Sig. Sig. level
18- Male
Female
15.500
15.500
110.5 0.000 1.000 Non-sig.
19- Male
Female
12.176
19.846
54 2.568 0.010 Sig. at0.05
20- Male
Female
13.088
18.654
69.5 1.875 0.061 Non-sig.
21- Male
Female
14.265
17.115
89.5 0.902 0.367 Non-sig
22- Male
Female
13.412
18.231
75 1.570 0.116 Non-sig.
102
23- Male
Female
11.706
20.462
46 2.822 0.005 Sig. at 0.01
24- Male
Female
13.088
18.654
69.5 1.856 0.064 Non-sig.
25- Male
Female
13.882
17.615
83 1.289 0.197 Non-sig.
26- Male
Female
12.971
18.808
67.5 2.045 0.041 Sig.at0.05
27- Male
Female
12.706
19.154
63 2.322 0.020 Sig. at 0.05
28- Male
Female
13.059
18.692
69 1.890 0.059 Non-sig.
29- Male
Female
14.853
16.346
99.5 0.500 0.617 Non-sig.
30- Male
Female
14.412
16.923
92 0.848 0.396 Non-sig.
Results of the above table show that computed Mann-Whitney Test values
indicate that there are significant differences of these items (19-23-26-27) in
the favor of female
103
Table ( 23 )
The Total Values of Means, U, Z and Sig. level of the whole observation
card due to the Gender of Students
Domains Sex Means U Z Sig. level Sig/
non-sig
-A- Male
Female
12.059
20.000
52 2.453 0.014 Sig. at
0.05
-B- Male
Female
11.794
20.346
47.5 2.643 0.008 Sig. at
0.01
Total Male
Female
11.588
20.615
44 2.788 0.005 Sig.at
0.01
Results of the above table show that there are significant differences at (0.05)
and (0.01) in the two domains and in the total degree of the observation card in
the favor of Female.
Fourth: The Answer of the Fourth Question
"Are there statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05) between the 11th
grade students of English classroom interaction due to the specialization of
students (science and human sciences)?"
To answer the fourth question, the researcher used Mann-Whitney Test in
order to compute the values of the observation card items as in tables (24), (25)
& (26)
104
Table (24)
Means, Z , U values and Sig. level due to the Students` Specialization of
the First Domain ( Teacher`s performance)
No Specialization Means U Z Sig.
level
Sig. /
non-sig.
1- Science
Human sciences
18.278
14.310
69.5 1.208 0.227 Non-sig.
2- Science
Human sciences
15.389
15.548
93.5 0.049 0.961 Non-sig.
3- Science
Human sciences
9.889
17.905
44 2.401 0.016 Sig.at
0.05
4- Science
Human sciences
16.056
15.262
89.5 0.248 0.804 Non-sig.
5- Science
Human sciences
15.944
15.310
90.5 0.197 0.844 Non-sig.
6- Science
Human sciences
18.167
14.357
70.5 1.145 0.252 Non-sig
7- Science
Human sciences
14.333
16.000
84 0.533 0.594 Non-sig
8- Science
Human sciences
16.056
15.262
89.5 0.237 0.812 Non-sig.
9- Science
Human sciences
19.278
13.881
60.5 1.596 0.111 Non-sig.
10- Science
Human sciences
18.111
14.381
71 1.181 0.238 Non-sig.
11- Science
Human sciences
17.389
14.690
77.5 0.865 0.387 Non-sig.
12- Science
Human sciences
16.167
15.214
88.5 0.288 0.773 Non-sig.
13- Science
Human sciences
15.278
15.595
92.5 0.099 0.921 Non-sig.
105
14- Science
Human sciences
21.056
13.119
44.5 2.576 0.010 Sig. at
0.01
15- Science
Human sciences
16.278
15.167
87.5 0.347 0.729 Non-sig.
16- Science
Human sciences
20.278
13.452
51.5 2.128 0.033 Sig at
0.05
17- Science
Human sciences
17.222
14.762
79 0.732 0.464 Non-sig.
Results of the above table show that there are significant differences in
these items (3,14,16) in the favor of science students` classrooms.
Table (25)
Means, Z , U values and Sig. level of the Second Domain due to the
Students` Specialization
No Specialization Means U Z Sig.
level
Sig/non
sig
18- Science
Human sciences
17.111
14.810
80 0.719 0.472 Non-sig.
19- Science
Human sciences
17.944
14.452
72.5 1.081 0.279 Non-sig.
20- Science
Human sciences
20.611
13.310
48.5 2.274 0.023 Sig. at
0.05
21- Science
Human sciences
16.333
15.143
87 0.348 0.728 Non-sig.
22- Science
Human sciences
14.333
16.000
84 0.502 0.616 Non-sig.
23- Science
Human sciences
16.222
15.190
88 0.308 0.758 Non-sig.
24- Science
Human sciences
19.833
13.643
55.5 1.909 0.056 Non-sig.
106
25- Science
Human sciences
18.944
14.024
63.5 1.571 0.116 Non-sig.
26- Science
Human sciences
16.278
15.167
87.5 0.360 0.719 Non-sig.
27- Science
Human sciences
17.111
14.810
80 0.766 0.443 Non-sig.
28- Science
Human sciences
21.556
12.905
40 2.684 0.007 Sig. at
0.01
29- Science
Human sciences
17.167
14.786
79.5 0.737 0.461 Non-sig.
30- Science
Human sciences
16.333
15.143
87 0.372 0.710 Non-sig.
Results in table (25) show that there are significant differences at (0.05) &
(0.01) in these items (20,28) in the favor of science students` classrooms.
Table (26)
Means, U, Z values and Sig. level of the Whole Observation Card due to
the Specialization of Students
Domain Specialization Means U Z Sig. level Sig/ non-
sig.
-A- Science
Human sciences
17.167
14.786
79.5 0.680 0.496 Non- sig.
-B- Science
Human sciences
19.333
13.857
60 1.565 0.118 Non-sig.
The total Science
Human sciences
18.000
14.429
72 1.020 0.308 Non-sig.
107
Results in table (26) show that there are no significant differences at (0.01) and
(0.05) of the total average of the observation card due to the students`
specialization.
Fifth: The Answer of the Fifth Question
"Are there statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05) between the 11th
grade students of English classroom interaction due to the location of school ?"
To answer this question, the researcher used Kruskal Wallis Test, as shown
in table (27)
Table (27)
Means, Chi-square, df and Sig. level of the First Domain of the
Observation Card due to the Location of School
No Location of
school
Means Chi-
square
DF Sig.
level
Sig.
non-sig.
1- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
19.125
10.000
17.929
7.823
2
0.020
Sig. at
0.05
2- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
15.458
15.591
15.429
0.002
2
0.999
Non-sig.
3- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
15.917
19.545
8.429
7.576
2
0.023
Sig. at
0.05
4- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
14.667
15.273
17.286
0.483
2
0.785
Non-sig.
108
5- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
18.083
12.273
16.143
3.003
2
0.223
Non-sig.
6- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
19.000
10.955
16.643
5.496
2
0.064
Non-sig.
7- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
18.417
12.136
15.786
3.685
2
0.158
Non-sig.
8- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
17.917
12.227
16.500
2.764
2
0.251
Non-sig.
9- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
21.833
11.545
10.857
11.159
2
0.004
Sig. at
0.01
10- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
16.625
13.227
17.143
1.446
2
0.485
Non-sig.
11- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
13.458
15.364
19.214
2.392
2
0.302
Non-sig.
12- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
15.458
17.182
12.929
1.123
2
0.570
Non-sig.
13- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
18.292
14.182
12.786
2.548
2
0.280
Non-sig.
14- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
18.250
12.955
14.786
2.769
2
0.250
Non-sig.
109
15- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
19.083
11.773
15.214
4.763
2
0.092
Non-sig.
16- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
17.458
13.455
15.357
1.422
2
0.491
Non-sig.
17- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Beit Hannon
15.458
14.273
17.500
0.627
2
0.731
Non-sig.
Results of the above table show that there are significant differences at (0.01)
and (0.05) in items (1, 9) in the favor of Jabalia. Also, there are significant
differences at (0.05) in item (3) in the favor of Beit lahia.
Table (28)
Means, Chi square, DF and Sig. level of the Second Domain of the
Observation Card due to the Location of School
No Location of
school
Means Chi-
square
DF Sig.
level
Sig. /
non-sig.
18- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
11.542
16.500
20.714
6.030
2
0.049
Sig. at
0.05
19- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
15.375
13.500
18.857
1.874
2
0.392
Non-sig.
20- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
18.458
13.682
13.286
2.706
2
0.258
Non-sig.
21- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
18.250
16.727
8.857
5.659
2
0.059
Non-sig.
110
22- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
15.792
14.318
16.857
0.422
2
0.810
Non-sig.
23- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
18.542
12.364
15.214
3.099
2
0.212
Non-sig.
24- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
18.000
13.545
14.286
2.705
2
0.259
Non-sig.
25- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
14.667
13.727
19.714
2.705
2
0.259
Non-sig.
26- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
21.292
13.227
9.143
12.367
2
0.002
Sig.at
0.01
27- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
18.500
14.182
12.429
3.400
2
0.183
Non-sig.
28- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
15.750
15.364
15.286
0.020
2
0.990
Non-sig.
29- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
16.458
18.273
9.500
5.283
2
0.071
Non-sig
30- Jabalia
Beit-Lahia
Beit-Hannon
16.333
16.364
12.714
1.097
2
0.578
Non-sig.
Results in table (28) show that there are significant differences at (0.05) in item
(18) in the favor of Beit-Hannon and there are significant differences at (0.01)
in item (26) in the favor of Jabalia.
111
Table (29)
Means, Chi-square, DF, Sig. level of the whole observation card due to the
Location of School
Domain Location Means Chi-
square
DF Sig.
level
Sig. /
Non-sig.
- A- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Hannon
18.750
12.909
14.000
2.802
2
0.246
Non-sig
-B- Jabalia
Beit lahia
Hannon
18.125
14.400
13.357
1.809
2
0.405
Non-sig.
The
total
Jabalia
Beit lahia
Hannon
18.500
13.273
13.827
2.349
2
0.309
Non-sig.
The results of the above table show that there are no significant differences at
(0.01) & (0.05) between 11th grade students` interaction level due to the
location of the school.
112
Chapter Five
Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations
This chapter aims at discussing the results and connecting them with the
results of previous studies, providing recommendations, giving suggestions for
further researches.
The Discussion of the Results of the First Question
"What are the main factors affecting English classroom interaction of the 11th
grade students in North Gaza Governmental Schools?"
As it is clear in table (17), the results of the questionnaire show that these
factors affect the classroom interaction with different degrees as shown in the
mentioned tables. Table (17) shows the order of these factors: factors related to
the teacher which score (70.94%) and it is a high degree, factors related to the
textbook which score (62.22%) and it is a moderate degree, and factors related
to students which score (58.73%) and it is a low degree. As it is obvious, the
results show that factors related to the teacher are the most effective.
The results of this study confirm what the Second Educational Commission
stated as cited in ( Kochhar, 1997: 152-153) that " …. The best curriculum and
the most perfect syllables remain dead unless quickened into life by right
methods of teaching and right kind of teachers". Therefore, the researcher
believes that the teacher is the most vital single factor in the system of
education. The teacher is a key factor in the successful implementation of
curriculum changes.
113
As it is obvious in the first domain of the questionnaire, all the items of
factors related to the teacher show that teachers have many different kinds of
responsibilities to create the environment conducive to interaction in the class:
First of all the results show that the teacher should have extensive
information about each pupil in their charge. They should use this information
in deciding what to expect from each student and give them according to their
needs. They should also know the interrelationships between the pupils of their
class and avoid compulsions in the matters, such as, sitting arrangements,
forming teams for work or pairs for assignments and play groups. A teacher
should let the students choose their own partners and co-workers as far as
possible.
Also, positive teacher-students relationships have a positive effect on
classroom interaction as mentioned in Corder`s study (1999)
Second, the results show that teacher questioning has a positive effect on
students` interaction. The researcher thinks that teachers ask questions to find
out how much students know and to give them an opportunity to rehearse,
interpret, and apply what they do know. Students interact either by answering
questions or by listening to other students` answers. These results confirm the
results of Ackers and Hardman`s study (2001); which revealed that telling,
suggesting, negotiating and listening are designed to free students to give their
own views and promote a real discussion.
Third, the results show that when teachers encourage students to interact,
help students to find the answers of questions and involve most students in the
114
activities with equal opportunities, all these activities lead to an interactive
classroom.
Fourth, a good preparation for the subject has a positive effect and find out
what equipment is available. Moreover, teachers should keep the sense of
humor. It relaxes tension, helps establishing natural relationships and facilitates
learning.
Fifth, a positive reinforcement has a positive effect on students` interaction.
The researcher believes that teacher should praise the students when they give
desirable responses and encourage them to improve when the responses are not
appropriate.
Sixth, the variety of activities has a positive effect on classroom interaction.
The researcher thinks that teachers have to be creative in providing a large
number of varied activities to be able to hold the interest of their students. (See
table 14)
The results of the second domain of the questionnaire "Factors related to
the students" show that these factors are not effective. Students` motivation and
attitudes towards English language are low as in table (15). The results show
that students play a passive role in the learning process. These results are
consistent with the results of Al-Haj`s study (1995), he stated that since audio-
lingual approach was implemented in Palestinian Schools, students were
trained to use vocabulary and produce structure in artificial and formal
situations with the help of repetition and imitation of the model. Also, he
criticized the audio-lingual approach that was adopted by the teachers of
English in Palestine and other Arab countries. He described the role of the
115
learner through this method as having a dual role. As a hearer, he recognizes
and discriminates, and as a speaker, he imitates, repeats and finally memorizes.
He noticed that the Palestinian learner is unable to give one or two utterances
without committing any mistakes in phonology and syntax. This inability
impedes the learner`s communicative competence.
Moreover, the teaching of English language as a foreign language methods
used in Gaza strip are " traditional inadequate and have not helped the students
to learn properly" ( Amer, 1986)
In addition, Kharma and Hajjaj (1989 as cited in Al-masri) stated that the
students` English Performance is very low compared to the time and weight
allocated for learning English. This is mainly due to the ineffectiveness of the
syllabus taught.
The researcher attributes that students have low motivation and attitudes
towards English language to:
1- The effect of Intifada " Al-qsa Intifada"
2- The fact that, some teachers were not motivated and well trained to
teach English.
3- The fact that, teachers have to finish the curriculum whether or not their
students have understood or acquired the skills.
116
The results of the third domain of the questionnaire " Factors related to
the textbook" are consistent with Abu Daka (1996) that the textbook does not
address the present and future needs of the students. It is not culturally
appropriate and does not connect with students` every day life. ( See table 16)
It is worthy to say that the Ministry of Education works on a new
Palestinian English curriculum instead of the Egyptian curriculum in Gaza
Strip and the Jordanian one in the West Bank.
To sum up, the results of the first question show that factors affecting
English classroom-interaction are according to this order:
Firstly, factors related to the teacher.
Secondly, factors related to the textbook.
Thirdly, factors related to the students.
The Discussion of the Results of the Second Question
"What is the level of English classroom interaction in the 11th grade students in
North Gaza Governmental Schools?"
As it is clear in table (20), the results show that the total percentage of
classroom interaction level scores a moderate level. The researcher attributes
that student interaction level is moderate to:
Teachers rarely use audio visual aids, TV. Set and O.H.P. The researcher
believes that teachers rely too much on the use of textbooks as the primary
source of knowledge. They use pictures, objects, charts, flash cards, wall
117
charts, sketches and drawings when they are available. They rarely use video
tapes and over head projector, as mentioned in Abu Jarad (1997).
Teachers do not give students opportunities to practice conversation in
pairs or groups. The results of this study are consistent with Abu-Jarad`s study
(1991). He stated that teachers of English in Gaza Strip do not give students
opportunities to participate in situations that demonstrate the normal use of
language which accordingly affects the learning of language and make it
artificial.
Moreover, the researcher thinks that lack of classroom interaction may due
to the students` performance. Sometimes, this may have to do with the
student`s own character. Sometimes, it is because there are other students who
dominate and almost intimidate. Sometimes, it is because students are simply
not used to talking freely for reasons of culture and background. Perhaps, they
suffer from a fear of making mistakes and therefore losing face in front of the
teacher and peers.
In addition, the textbook plays an important role of interactive classroom,
whether it is suitable for students to understand or not.
118
The Discussion of the Results of the Third Question
"Are there statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05) between the 11th
grade students of English classroom interaction due to the gender of students (
male and female)?"
Results in table (23) of Mann Whitney Test reveal that there are significant
differences at (0.01 & 0.05) in English classroom interaction of 11th grade
students due to the gender of students. The results are in the favor of female
students. The results of this study confirm the results of Kang`s study ( 2000 ).
He stated that female students consistently reported more positive attitudes
toward second language learning.
The researcher thinks that female students are interested in learning English
language and they have positive attitudes toward it in order to pass their final
examinations and join the university. Female students spend most of their time
at home, so they have enough time to prepare their lessons. Also, the researcher
thinks that male students were more affected by Al-qsa Intifada and political
circumstances as many students have been shot dead and hundreds wounded
during Intifada. Moreover, strikes and demonstrations play a role in the loss of
school days especially in male students' schools.
119
The Discussion of the Results of the Fourth Question
"Are there statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05) between the 11th
grade students in the English classroom interaction due to the specialization
( Science & Humanities)?"
Results in table (26) of Man Whitney Test reveal that there are no
significant differences at (α 0.05 & 0.01) in English classroom interaction of
11th grade students due to the specialization of students (Science &
Humanities).
The researcher thinks that both of the two sections have the same social ,
economic, political and educational circumstances and may be they have the
same teachers.
The Discussion of the Results of the Fifth Question
"Are there statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05) between the 11th
grade students in the English classroom interaction due to the location of
school?"
Results in table (29) of Kruskal Wallis test reveal that there are no
statistically significant differences at (0.05 & 0.01) of English classroom
interaction of 11th grade students in North Gaza Governmental Schools due to
the location of school.
The researcher thinks that these three regions have the same social,
economic, political and educational circumstances. Also, students do not have
opportunities to join to centers or clubs for teaching and practicing English
language.
120
In addition, students do not have opportunities to practise English language
outside school, so they prefer to learn by heart.
121
Conclusion
Based on the results of the study, the following conclusions were reached:
6- The main factors affecting English classroom interaction were in this
order: factors related to the teacher, factors related to the textbook, and
factors related to the student.
7- The level of English classroom interaction of 11th grade students in
North Gaza Governmental Schools was moderate.
8- There were statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05 ) between
11th grade student of English classroom interaction due to the gender of
students in the favor of female students.
9- There were no statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05 )
between 11th grade student of English classroom interaction due to the
specialization of students (science & humanities).
10- There were no statistically significant differences at (α ≤ 0.05 )
between 11th grade student of English classroom interaction due to the
location of school.
122
Recommendations
On the basis of the findings of this study and in the light of the factors
affecting English classroom interaction, the researcher offers some
recommendations to the Ministry of Education and teachers as well as the
researchers who are interested in TEFL and the curriculum designers.
Recommendations for the Ministry of Education:
The researcher suggests the following recommendations for the
Ministry of Education
1- The Ministry of Education should encourage the teachers to use the
appropriate equipments such as TV. Set and O. H. P. that help them in
teaching English.
2- The Ministry of Education should minimize the number of students
inside the classroom in order to give students the proper care and
attention.
3- Teachers should be trained to use the various techniques that enable
them to choose the proper techniques relevant to their teaching
situation.
4- The curriculum planners are also recommended to vary the types of
activities in order to apply different types of interactions.
5- The Ministry of Education should extend the school -day in order to
maximize opportunities for students to speak and interact.
123
Recommendations for teachers
The researcher suggests the following recommendations for teachers
1- Teachers should help students to interact with various techniques, and
not to be led to unfavorable techniques.
2- Teachers should encourage interaction between students rather than
only between student and teacher.
3- Teachers should encourage co-operation rather than competition.
4- Teachers should show the students their own interest in the topic.
5- Teachers should arrange seating so that students can all see each other
and talk to each other ( Circles, squares and horseshoes rather than
parallel rows)
6- Teachers should use pairs and small groups to maximize opportunities
for students to speak.
7- Teachers should allow time for students to listen, think, process their
answer and speak.
8- Teachers should provide frequent feedback to students, including
positive reinforcement and concrete suggestions for improvement.
9- Exchanging classroom visits inside the school and with other schools in
order to exchange experience.
10- Teachers should encourage students to use the modern technology such
as the internet and multimedia to learn English language and its culture.
124
Recommendations for further studies:
The researcher suggests the following recommendations for further
studies
1- Studying the effect of classroom interaction on students` achievement.
2- Studying the effect of periods` distribution on enabling the teachers to
apply different types of interaction.
3- Testing some variables that affect the attitudes of students towards
learning language.
4- Evaluating the New Palestinian English Curriculum in the light of the
results of this study.
125
References
Abdel Samie, H. & Abdel Samie, M. (1996) " Task based interaction in EFL classroom". 16th CDELT National Symposium on English Language teaching in Egypt Sunday March 10- Tuesday March 12,1996, Cairo: Ain Shams University.
Abu Dagga, S. ( 1995). "Teachers` opinion about the English curricula in
Palestine: Field study". A paper presented to the Educational conference, Palestine
Ackers, J. & Hardman F. (2001). " Classroom interaction in Kenyan Primary
schools". A journal of Comparative Education. Vol.31 No. 2, P.258 Adams, D. & Hamm, M. (1994). New designs for teaching and learning. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers Aggarwal, J. (1995). Teacher and Education in a developing society. New
Delhi: Cougar services PVT. Ltd Al-Ghaunami, E. (2003). "The effect of a suggested video program on
developing the communicative skills of the 11th grade learners of English in Gaza Governorates." Unpublished thesis. Faculty of Education. Al-Azhar University, Gaza
Al-Ghussain, R. (2001). "Factual oral communication techniques in teaching
English for Gazan 10th grade student". Unpublished thesis. Faculty of Education, Al-Azhar University, Gaza.
Al- Haj Ahmed, M. (1995). "Concord in English and Palestinian spoken
Arabic ( P.A): A contrastive analysis". Unpublished thesis, University of Khartoum, Sudan
Al-Masri, N. (1993). "Developing learning materials for Palestinian learners
of English in Gaza Strip". Unpublished Ph.D. University of Manchester
Allwright, D. & Baily, K. (1994). Focus on the language classroom. New
York: Cambridge University Amer, W. (1986). " A description of the present state of TEFL in Gaza Strip
secondary schools and some suggestions for improving the level of teaching and learning" Unpublished master`s thesis, University of Glasgow, Scotland
126
Anderman, F. et. al. ( 1998). Motivation and middle school students
ERIC-No: ED 421281 Retrieved June, 2003 from http:// www. Askeric. Org/
Appel, R. & Muysken, P. (1988) Language contact and bilingualism.
London: Edward Arnold Arends, R. (1991). Learning to teach. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc Auster, C. & Macrone, M. (1994). "The classroom as a negotiated social
setting: An Empirical study of the effects of faculty members` behavior on students` participation." ERIC No: EJ 496965 Retrieved September 25,2003 from http://www.askeric. Org/
Bartscher, K. (1995). Increasing student motivation through project- based
learning ERIC No: ED 392549 Retrieved September 25, 2003 from http://www.askeric. Org/
BBC English Dictionary (1992). London: Harper Collins Publioshers Berman, S. (1997). Children`s social consciousness and development of
social responsibility. New York: State University of New York, Albany
Borich, G. (2004). Effective teaching methods. New York: Macmillan Boural, H. (1991). Dynamic teaching. New Delhi: B.R. publishing
corporation Brunie, L. & Kintz, K. (1986). Computation handbook of statistics.
Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman company Cajkler, W. & Addelman, R. (1992). The practice of foreign language
teaching. London: David Fulton Chang, S. et. al. (1999). Language learning motivation and language
learning strategies of Taiwanese EFL students ERIC No: ED 428561 Retrieved September 25, 2003 from http://www. askeric. org/
127
Chang, S. (2003). Learning through interaction: English learning in an adult IEP classroom
Publication number AAT 3048915 Retrieved September 20, 2003 from http://wwwlib.umi.com/dissertation/search/ Chaube, S. & Chaube, A. (1997). School organization. New Delhi: VIKAS
Publishing House Chauhan, S.( 1998). Advanced educational psychology. New Delhi: VIKAS
Publishing House Pvt LTD Christison, M. (1994). Cooperative Learning in the EFL classroom. (ed.)
Kral, T. Teacher development making the right moves. Washington: United States Information Agency
Clifton, R. (1997)." The effects of social psychological variables and gender
on the grade point averages and educational expectations of university students: a case study". Research into Higher Education Abstracts (1998), Vol.31 No. 3, p. 252
Cohen, L. & Manion, L. (1992). A guide to teaching practice. London:
Routledge 3rd edition Consolo, D. (2000). Teachers` action and student oral participation in
classroom interaction. (ed.) Hall, J. & Verplaetse, L. Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cook, V. (1991). Second language learning and language teaching. New
York: Routledge. Corder, G. (1999). The practices, attitudes, and behaviors of experienced
teachers that motivate middle grades students. ERIC No: ED 442785 Retrieved September 25, 2003 from http:// www. askeric. org/
Crystal, D. & Johnson, K. (1996). Applied Language Studies. Oxford:
Blackwell Dahama, O. & Bhatnagar, O. (1998). Education and communication for
development. New Delhi: Oxford. Second edition Dandekar, W. (1998). Psychological foundations of education. New Delhi:
Macmillan
128
Dempsey, J. & Sales, G. (1993). Interactive instruction and feedback.
Englewood: Educational Technology publications Deskeyrel, A. (2000). Using motivational strategies to improve academic
achievement of middle school students ERIC No: ED 443550 Retrieved August 11, 2003 from http:// www. askeric. org/
Dinana, F. (n.d.). Feedback: The Art of Giving and Receiving Information
http://www.Salzburgseminar.Org/ASC/csacl/progs/interactive/FOUAD.htm
Doff, A. (1995). Teach English. New York: Cambridge University Press Dougan, V. (1999). " Peer-prompted social skills: the role of teacher
consultation in student success", Educational psychology. Vol. 19, No.2, P. 207
Duff, P. (2000). Repetition in Foreign language classroom interaction. (ed.)
Hall, J. & Verplaetse, L. Second and Foreign language learning through classroom interaction. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Echevarria, J. et. al. (2004). Making Content comprehensible for English
Language Learners. New York: Peartson Education Lted El- Sakran, T. & Ankit, A. (1995)."Turn-taking strategies in classroom
interaction". Occasional papers in the development of English language education. Vol. 21 Cairo: Ain Shams University
Emmer, E. & Hickman, J. (1991). " Teacher Efficacy in classroom
management and discipline" Educational and psychological measurement. Vol. 51 No. 3 p. 756
Fassinger, A. (1995). Understanding classroom interaction: students` and
professors` contributions to students` silence. ERIC No: ED 497848 Retrieved September 25, 2003 from http:// www. askeric . org /
Ford, J. (1990). Engaging students through class-participation.
ERIC No: ED 345957 Retrieved September 25, 2003 from http://www. askeric. org /
129
Gall, M. et. al. (1990). Tools for learning. Alexandria: Virginia Gebhard, J. (1999). Teaching English as a foreign or second language.
United states of America: The University of Michigan press. 4th edition
Goldberg, K. (2001). Improving student motivation through cooperative
learning and other strategies ERIC NO: ED 455464 Retrieved August 11, 2003 from http://www.askeric.org /
Goldstein, H. & Blackford, P. (1998). " Class size and educational
achievement", British Educational Research Journal. Vol. 24 No. 3
Good, T. & Brophy, J. (1987). Looking in classrooms. New York: Harper
and Row Gower, R. et al. (1995). Teaching Practice Handbook. Oxford: Heinemann Hall, J. (2000). Classroom interaction and additional language learning:
implications for teaching and research.(ed.) Hall, J. & Verplaetse, L.. Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Harmer, J. (1998). How to teach English: An introduction to the practice of
English Language teaching. London: Longman Hayes, D. (1998). Effective verbal communication. London: Hodder &
Stoughton Haynes, N. & Fopiano, J. (2001). School Climate and Social and Emotional
Development in the Young Child (e.d) Cohen, J. Caring Classrooms Intelligent Schools. New York: Teachers College Press
Higgs, G. (1995). Preferences of participating and non-participating
students for different pedagogical methods ERIC No: ED 384604 Retrieved September 25, 2003 from http://www.askeric . org /
130
Howard, J. & Henney, A. (1998). " Student participation and instructor gender in the mixed-age college classroom". Research into Higher Education Abstracts (1999), Vol. 32 No. 1 P:50
Ilola, L. et. al. (1995) Structuring student interaction to promote learning.
(ed.) Kral, T. Creative classroom activities. Washington: United States Information Agency
Johnson, D. et. al. (1994). Cooperative learning in the classroom.
Alexandria: Virginia Johnson, K. (1995). Understanding communication in second language
classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press Kang, D. (2000). Motivation is such a complex process in the EFL foreign
language classroom. ERIC No: ED 444354 Retrieved September 25, 2003 from http://www.askeric.org/
Kara, R. (1992). Language learning and teaching. El-Fateh: El-Fateh
University Keshta, A. (2000). "Alternative approaches for teaching English literature to
undergraduate students in Gaza Strip". Unpublished Ph.D. USA. University of Houston
Knight, L. (2002). "The benefits of student-student interaction among adult
students in the English as a second language classroom". Unpublished Ph.D. Rutgers the State University of New Jersey- New Brunswick. Publication No: AAT 3047837 Retrieved September 20, 2003 from http://wwwlib.umi.com/dissertation/search/
Kochhar, S. (1997). Secondary school administration. New Delhi: Sterling
publishers Pvt Koul, L. (1999). Methodology of educational research. New Delhi: Vikas
publishing House PVTLTD Kyriacou, C. (1997). Effective Teaching in Schools. Padstow: Stanley
Thornes Publisher Kyriacou, C. (1998). Essential teaching skills. London: Blackwell Ltd
131
Linton, T. (1998). " An investigation into the interaction of teaching and learning in primary design and technology, academic ability and classroom behavior". The Journal of Design and Technology Education. Vol.3, No.3 page 216-222
Littlewood, W. (1995). Foreign and second language learning: language-
acquisition research and its implications for the classroom. New York: Cambridge University press
Long, M. & Richards, J. (1987). Methodology in TESOL. New York: New
Bury House publishers Looker, E. (1997). "In search of credentials: factors affecting Young adults`
participation in postsecondary education". Research into Higher Education Abstracts (1998), Vol.31 No.3, page 261
Lopez, C. (1994). The role of the teacher in today`s language classroom.
(ed.)Kral, T. Teacher development making the right moves. Washington: United States Information Agency
Lopez, S. (1995). The effect of the relationship between classroom student
diversity and teacher capacity on student performance. Eric- No: ED 386423 Retrieved November 10, 2004 from http://www.askeric.org/
Lumsden, L. (1994). Student motivation to learn ERIC No : ED 370200 Retrieved Nov.20, 2004 http://www.askeric.org/ Mabrouk, W. (2002). "Vocabulary Teaching Techniques of EFL Palestinian
Teachers at the Basic Stage in Nablus District". Unpublished thesis. An-Najah National University, West Bank
Mamidi, M. & Ravishankar, S. (1998) Curriculum development and
educational technology. New Delhi: Sterling publishers Metelo, A. (n. d.). Describing Classroom interaction. Retrieved Dec. 11, 2004 http://www.salzburgseminar.Org/ASC/csacl/progs/interactive/
ANA.htm Moriarity, J. (2001). Increasing student motivation through the use of
instructional strategies ERIC- No: ED 455962 Retrieved August 11, 2003 from http://www.askeric.org/
132
Nanda, V. (1997). Environmental education. New Delhi: ANMOL
publications PVTLTD Naqeeb, H. (1997). "The effect of role-play model on improving the
speaking proficiency of English of the 8th grade students at UNRWA schools in Nablus area". Unpublished M.A. thesis, Al-Najah University
Nunan, D. (1995). Language teaching methodology. New York: Phoenix
ELT. Nystrand, S.(2001) " Factors influencing educational motivation: a study of
attitudes, expectations and behavior of children in Sunderland, Kentucky and St Petersburg", Compare. Vol. 25, No. 1 P. 75
Oller, J. & Richard- Amato, P. (1983). Methods that work. New York:
Newbury House Publishers
Omving, P. (1989). Teacher / Student Classroom Interaction in Vocational Education. ERIC-No: ED 342943
Retrieved November 10, 2004 from http://www.askeric.org/
Orlich, O. et al. (1994). Teaching Strategies: A guide to better instruction.
Lexington: D. C. Health and Company Pridmore, P. (2000). " Children`s participation in development for school
health". Compare. Vol.30, No. 1, page 103 Prodromou, L. (1994). The good language teacher. (ed.) Kral, T. Teacher
development making the right moves . Washington: United States Information Agency
Qawasmi, N. (1995). "Problems in teaching English conversational
interaction". Unpublished M.A thesis, Al-Najah University Reinsch, R. & Wambsganss, J. (1994). Classroom participation: How it
affects results on examination. ERIC No: EJ 490529 Retrieved September 25, 2003 from http://www.askeric.org/
133
Rhodes, C. (2002). "The ethos of a middle school modular technology education classroom." Unpublished Ph.D. University of Minnesota Publication No: 3056351 Retrieved September 20, 2003 from http://wwwlib.umi.com/dissertation/search/
Richards, J. & Lockhart, C. (1997). Reflective teaching in second language
classrooms. New York: Cambridge University press, 4th edition Richards, J. & Nunan, D. (1995). Second language teacher education. New
York: Cambridge University press Rowe, M. (1986). "Wait Time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up".
Journal of Teacher Education, 37: 43-50 Sadker, M. & Sadker, D. (1991). Teachers, schools, and society. New York:
MCGRAW-Hill, Inc Seliger, H. (1983). Learner Interaction in the Classroom and Effect on
Language Acquistion. Rowley, M.A. : Newbury House Sharma, R. N. & Sharma, R. K. (1996). Advanced educational psychology.
New Delhi: APD Computer Graphics Shipman, M. (1990). In search of learning: A new approach to school
management. Padstow: Blackwell Education Slavin, R. (1995). Cooperative learning. London: Allyn and Bacon Thomson, M. (1996). Motivation in school learning. (ed.)Skinner, C.
Educational psychology. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall, 4 th edition Tinzmann, M. et al (1990). What is the collaborative classroom? Retrieved Sep.2002 from http://www. Ncrel. Org/sdrs/areas/rpl-esys/collab.htm. Tsui, A. (1995). Introducing classroom interaction. London: Penguin group Ur, P. (1992). A course in language teaching. New York: Cambridge
University press Walklin, L. (2000). Teaching and learning in further and adult education.
London: Stanley Thornes Ltd
134
المراجع العربیة
: غزة . البحث التربوي ، عناصره ، مناھجھ ، أدواتھ). 1996(االغا ، احسان
الجامعة االسالمیة
، 2 ط.التربوي مقدمة في تصمیم البحث). 2000(األغا ، احسان و األستاذ ، محمود
غزة ، مطبعة الرنتیسي للنشر
ائل التعلیمیة في المرحلة األساسیةتقویم استخدام الوس) . 1997(أبو جراد ، سلیمان
الجامعة ) رسالة ماجستیر غیر منشورة ( الدنیا بمدارس محافظات غزة
غزة–االسالمیة
: التفاعل الصفي ) . 2002( ابراھیم ، مجدي عزیز و حسب اهللا ، محمد عبد الحلیم
1عالم الكتب ، ط : القاھرة . مفھومھ ، تحلیلھ ، مھاراتھ
دار : ، القاھرة 1 ،ط تحلیل المحتوي في العلوم االنسانیة) . 1987(شدي طعیمة ، ر
الفكر العربي
– تطبیقاتھ–أساسیاتھ : التفاعل الصفي . ) 2003( عبد الھادي ، نبیل و آخرون
.دار قندیل للنشر: عمان . ه مھارات
1ط ،وصفيالاالحصاء : الجزء األول ،االحصاء التربوي) . 1997( عفانة ، عزو
1مطبعة المقداد ط: غزة
، االجصاء االستداللي: االحصاء التربوي ، الجزء الثاني ). 1998(عفانة ، عزو
مطبعة المقداد : ، غزة 1ط
135
تحلیل التفاعل اللفظي في دروس الطلبة المعلمین في" . ) 1989(نشوان ، یعقوب
مجلد األمل ، العلوم ، المجلة جامعة الملك سعود" . جامعة الملك سعود
97 – 79ص ) 2 ، 1( التربویة
"اللفظي داخل غرفة الصف تطویر نظام لتحلیل التفاعل" ) . 1993(نشوان ، یعقوب
161 ص 60، المجلد التاسع ، الجزء دراسات تربویةمجلة
136
Appendixes
137
Appendix ( A )
List of Juries
1- Ehsan Al-agha Ph.D. in Education The Islamic University
2- Awad Keshta Ph.D. in English The Islamic University
3- Ezo Afana Ph.D. in Education The Islamic University
4- Sana Abu Daga Ph.D. in Education The Islamic University
5- Nazmy Al-Masri Ph.D. in English The Islamic University
6- Hassan Abu Jarad Ph.D. in English Al-Azhar University
7- Sadeq Ferwana M.A. in Linguistics The Islamic University
8- Mohey Eldin Al-helou The head of supervision department at the
directorate of Education- North Gaza
138
Appendix (B)
The Questionnaire
This questionnaire concerns the Main Factors Affecting English
Classroom Interaction for the 11th grade in North Gaza
Governmental Schools.
Please, read each item carefully and put a tick ( ) under the
most alternative choice that points to your response to each item.
The results of this study will be used only for research purposes.
The researcher greatly appreciates your answering the items
honestly and objectively.
The researcher
Randa Al-majdalawi
139
The statement
V.low
Low
Neutral
High
V. high
A- Factors related to the teacher
1- Teacher asks frequent
questions
2- Teacher provides students
opportunities to practise
English language Skills they
have learned
3- Teacher`s interest in students`
needs is
4- Teacher prepares carefully to
motivate the students
5- Teacher encourages students to
participate.
6- Teacher involves most students
in the activity
7- Teacher communicates with
students in a friendly way
8- Teacher elaborates students`
inquiries
140
9- Teacher asks students about
their opinions related to the
subject
10 Teacher provides students
opportunities to work in
pairs/groups
11- Teacher's relationship with
students is..
12 Teacher tells students jokes
related to the subject
13- Teacher uses materials to help
students understand the
structure of English language.
14- Teacher uses positive
reinforcement.
15- Teacher helps students to find
the answers( by clues,
gestures).
16- Teacher varies drills to practise
English language structures.
17- Teacher uses audio visual aids.
18- Teacher provides students
opportunities to practise
conversations in pairs
141
19- Teacher provides students
frequent positive feedback.
20- Teacher`s morale is..
21- Teacher`s expectation of
students is ..
22- Teacher uses the following
equipments:
-record player
23- Television
24- Over head projector
B-
Factors related to the student
1- Students` motivation towards
English language is ..
2- Students` attitude toward
English language is..
3- Students` self-esteem is..
4- Students use English structures
in pair and group
5- Students prepare their lessons.
6- Students comment on their
classmates` answers
7- Students have self- confidence
142
The statement
v.low
low
Neutral
High
v.high
8- Students` relationship with
classmates is..
9- Students` relationship with
their teacher is..
10 Morale among students is..
C-
Factors related to the textbook
1- The textbook is relevant to the
students` culture
2- The textbook is sufficient to
the students` need
3- The textbook is suitable for
students` level
4- The textbook is interesting.
5- The textbook is suitable for
schedule
6- The textbook is organized
143
Appendix (C)
The Observation Card
The observer`s name:_______________________ Date of the observation: _____________________ Aims of the lesson: _________________________ -Specialization of students: ( ) Science ( ) Humanities - Students` gender: ( ) Female ( ) Male - The location of the school: ( ) Jabalia ( ) Beit Hanoon ( ) Beit Lahia
144
A- Teacher`s Performance Never Seldom Sometimes Often Always
1- Teachers provide students
frequent opportunities to practise
English language skills they
have learned.
2- Teachers ask frequent questions.
3- Teachers explain a grammatical
point related to the subject.
4- Teachers explain meaning of
new vocabulary
5- Teachers give students clear
instructions.
6- Teachers provide students
opportunities to practise
conversation in groups and pairs.
7- Teachers varies drill to practise
English structures
8- Teachers provide enough wait-
time for students to answer
questions.
9- Teachers monitor what students
are doing in pair/ group.
10- Teachers involve students in the
activities.
145
11- Teachers elicit students`
responses related to their
subjects.
12- Teachers ask students to repeat a
sentence after them for
pronunciation practice.
13- Teachers provide students with
frequent feedback.
14- Teachers go round listening to
pairs practicing dialogue.
15- Teachers communicate with
students in a friendly way.
16- Teachers elaborate students`
inquiries.
17- Teachers help students to find
answers ( by clues, gestures)
B- Students` Performance Never Seldom Sometimes Often Always
1- Students use English language in
their conversations inside
classroom.
2- Students answer their teachers`
questions.
3- Students answer their
classmates` questions.
146
4- Students repeat new vocabulary
in choral.
5- Students listen to their teacher
positively.
6- Students practise English skills
in groups and pairs.
7- Students initiate asking
questions related to the subject.
8- Students answer comprehension
questions.
9- Students ask their teacher to
explain a point of grammar or
vocabulary.
10- Students ask their teacher to
clarify instructions for a task.
11- Students discuss a topic arising
from a reading text.
12- Students ask their teacher to
explain or repeat a previous
statement.
13- Students report the result of pair
and group work.
147
امللخص
العوامل املؤثرة علي التفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغة االجنليزية لدي طلبة
الصف احلادي عشر يف املدارس احلكومية حملافظة مشال غزة
االجنليزية لدى طلبة ة علي التفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغة هدفت هذه الدراسة ايل التعرف علي العوامل املؤثر
كومية حملافظة مشال غزة، و ذلك من خالل االجابة علي التساؤالت الصف احلادي عشر يف املدارس احل
:التالية
ما هي العوامل املؤثرة على التفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغة االجنليزية لدي طلبة الصف احلادي عشر يف -
املدارس احلكومية حملافظة مشال غزة من وجهة نظر املعلمني؟
جنليزية لدي طلبة الصف احلادي عشر يف املدارس ما هو مستوى التفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغة اال -
احلكومية حملافظة مشال غزة؟
يف مستوى التفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغة ( α ≤ 0.05)وجد فروق ذات داللة احصائية عندهل ت -
االجنليزيةلدى الطلبة يعزى ملتغري اجلنس؟
لتفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغة يف مستوى ا ( α ≤ 0.05)وق ذات داللة احصائية عندهل توجد فر -
االجنليزيةلدى الطلبة يعزى ملتغري التخصص؟
يف مستوى التفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغة ( α ≤ 0.05)وق ذات داللة احصائية عندهل توجد فر -
لدى الطلبة يعزى ملتغري موقع املدرسة؟ االجنليزية
ة وذلك ألن عدد العينة قليل حيث و قد تكونت الدراسة من عينتني، العينة األويل كانت عينة مسحي
معلماً و معلمة يعلمون اللغة االجنليزية لطلبة الصف احلادي عشر يف املدارس احلكومية 30تكونت من
148
أما العينة الثانية . 2004-2003حملافظة مشال غزة التابعة ملديرية التربية والتعليم و ذلك للعام الدراسي
. فصالً للطالبات مت اختيارهم عشوائيا13ً للطالب و فصال17ً فصالً ، 30فقد تكونت من
فقرة تتضمن عوامل تتعلـق 40و قد اتبعت الباحثة املنهج الوصفي، و قامت باعداد استبانة تكونت من
باملعلم والطالب والكتاب املدرسي للتعرف علي العوامل املؤثرة علي التفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغة االجنليزيـة
.من وجهة نظر املعلمني
فقرة و مت مالحظة العينة من قبـل مـشرفني 30نت من كما و قامت الباحثة باعداد بطاقة مالحظة تكو
.مادة اللغة االجنليزية التابعني ملديرية التربية والتعليم مشال غزة
Mann-Whitney و املتوسطات و معامل ارتباط بريسون واختبار ةاستخدمت الباحثة النسب املئوي
. لتحليل بيانات الدراسة Kruskal Wallis و
:يلو توصلت الباحثة ا
: العوامل املؤثرة يف التفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغة االجنليزية كانت علي الترتيب التايل-1
عوامل مرتبطة باملعلم-أ
عوامل مرتبطة بالكتاب املدرسي-ب
عوامل مرتبطة بالطالب-ج
. مستوي التفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغة االجنليزية لدى طلبة الصف احلادي عشر كان بدرجة متوسط-2
يف مستوى التفاعل الصفي ملـادة اللغـة ( α ≤ 0.05)وق ذات داللة احصائية عند توجد فر-3
.لدى الطلبة يعزى ملتغري اجلنس االجنليزية
يف مستوى التفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغـة ( α ≤ 0.05)وق ذات داللة احصائية عند ال توجد فر-4
.االجنليزيةلدى الطلبة يعزى ملتغري التخصص
يف مستوى التفاعل الصفي ملادة اللغـة ( α ≤ 0.05)وق ذات داللة احصائية عند ال توجد فر-5
.االجنليزية لدى الطلبة تعزي ملتغري موقع املدرسة
149
على ضوء النتائج السابقة أوصت الباحثة بتدريب معلمي اللغة االجنليزية على استخدام تقنيات متنوعة
األساليب املناسبة للموقف التعليمي من أجل تطبيق أنواع خمتلفة مـن لتمكنهم من اختيار التقنيات و
.التفاعل الصفي
رندا يوسف ادالوي :الباحثة
عوض قشطة . د و عزو عفانة. د. أ:اشراف
غزة-اجلامعة االسالمية