A STUDY ON PERCEPTION OF LECTURER-STUDENT INTERACTION IN ENGLISH MEDIUM SCIENCE LECTURES

Abstract

This paper, which is a part of a thesis, investigates the perception and practice of lecturers and students with regard to lecturer-student interaction in English medium science lectures of a university in Sri Lanka where English is a second language. This paper argues that dialogic lecturer-student interaction, which enables students to take a more active role in discussions compared to the use of recitation scripts (questions-answers-evaluations) developed in non-dialogic interactions, is likely to be beneficial for students’ content (lecture comprehension) and language development. The study revealed the complexity of the perception-practice dynamic, and the multi-faceted sub-set of factors which influenced students’ and lecturers’ behaviour in class, and their perception of that behaviour. Students’ lecture comprehension and classroom interaction were influenced by their language proficiency, though the students considered the lecturers’ lecture delivery style to be more important than their own language proficiency. This study also revealed that a culturally-embedded behaviour perpetuated by senior students, known as ragging (a kind of bullying), restricted the classroom interaction of the students.

Keywords

• Interaction, English Medium Instruction, dialogic, non-dialogic

A STUDY ON PERCEPTION OF LECTURER-STUDENT INTERACTION IN ENGLISH MEDIUM SCIENCE LECTURES

Öz

Bir tezin bölümü olan bu çalışma, İngilizce’nin ikinci dil olarak kullanıldığı Sri Lanka’da bir üniversitenin İngilizce olarak sürdürülen bilim derslerinde öğretmenlerin ve öğrencilerin öğretmen-öğrenci etkileşimine dair algılarını ve uygulamalarını incelemektedir. Bu araştırma, diyalojik olmayan etkileşimlerdeki ezbere senaryoların (soru-cevap-değerlendirme) kullanılmasıyla karşılaştırıldığında öğrencilerin tartışmalarda daha aktif bir rol almalarını sağlayan diyalojik öğretmen-öğrenci etkileşimlerinin öğrencilere içerik (dersi anlama) ve dil gelişimleri için daha faydalı olabileceğini ileri sürmektedir. Bu makale algı-uygulama dinamiğinin karmaşıklığını, sınıfta öğrencilerin ve öğretmenlerin davranışlarını etkileyen çok yönlü faktörleri, ve öğretmen ve öğrencilerin bu davranışları nasıl algıladıklarını ortaya koymaktadır. Her ne kadar öğrenciler öğretmenlerin ders verme tarzlarının onların dil yeterliğinden daha önemli olduklarını düşünseler de, öğrencilerin dersi anlamaları ve sınıf etkileşimleri onların dil yeterliğinden etkilenmektedir. Bu çalışma aynı zamanda ortaya çıkarmaktadır ki zorbalık veya bir tür sataşma olarak da bilinen son sınıf öğrencileri tarafından gösterilen kültürle iç içe geçmiş bir davranış öğrencilerin sınıf etkileşimlerini sınırlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Etkileşim, Öğretim Dili Olarak İngilizce, diyalojik, diyalojik olmayan

Kaynakça

1. Alexander, R. (2006) Towards Dialogic Teaching: Rethinking Classroom Talk. York: Dialogos. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination. Austin. Texas: University of Texas Press.
2. Block, D. (2003) The Social Turn in Second Language Acquisition. Edinburg: Edinburg University Press.
3. Buddhadasa, S. B. (2007) Stop Murder by Ragging, Sunday Observer, 1 July.
4. Cheng, X. (2000) Asian students' reticence revisited. System, 28: 435–446.
5. Denscombe, M. (2003) The Good Research Guide for Small Scale Social Research Projects. Berkshire: Open University Press.
6. English, E., Hargreaves, L. & Hislam, J. (2002) Pedagogical dilemmas in the national literacy strategy: Primary teachers' perceptions, reflections and classroom behaviour. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(1): 9–26.
7. Ernst, H. & Colthorpe, K. (2007) The efficacy of interactive lecturing for students with diverse science backgrounds. Advanced Physiological Education, 31: 41–44.
8. Firth, A. & Wagner, J. (1997) On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal, 81(3): 285–300.

9. Flowerdew, J. & Miller, L. (1995) On the notion of culture in L2 lectures. TESOL Quarterly, 29(2): 345–373.
10. Flowerdew, J. & Miller L. (1996b) Lecturer Perceptions, Problems and Strategies in Second Language Lectures. RELC Journal, 27(1): 23–46.
11. Flowerdew, J., Miller, L. & Li, D. C. S. (2000) Chinese lecturers' perceptions, problems, and strategies in lecturing in English to Chinese speaking students. RELC Journal, 31(1): 116–138.
12. Gunatilake, N. (2011) Ragging - the Deadly Monster. Sunday Observer, 28 May [Available at http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2011/04/10/fea02.asp., accessed 2 November, 2011].
13. Hall, J. K. & Verplaetse, L. S. (Eds.) (2000) Second and Foreign Language Learning through Classroom Interaction. In Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14. Hall, J. K. & Walsh, M. (2002) Teacher-student interaction and language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22: 186–203.
15. Haneda, M. (2005) Some functions of triadic dialogue in the classroom: Examples from L2 research. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 62(2): 313–333.
16. Haneda, M. & Wells, G. (2010) Learning science through dialogic inquiry: Is it beneficial for English-as-additional-language students? International Journal of Educational Research, 49: 10–21.
17. Hardman, F., Smith, F. & Wall, K. (2003) Interactive whole class teaching in the national literacy strategy. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(2): 197–215.
18. Harun, R. N. S. R. (2009) Understanding learners’ participation in an ESL classroom: A sociocultural perspective. English Language Journa,l 3: 9–26.
19. Huxham, M. (2005) Learning in lectures: Do 'interactive windows' help? Active Learning in Higher Education, 6(17): 17–31.
20. Karunaratne, I. M. (2003) Teaching English in urban Sri Lanka: Some pedagogical issues. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Sri Lanka Studies. Matara, Sri Lanka, 28–30 November, 2003.
21. Karunatilake, C. P. A. (2008) Human Capital Development and Resource Allocation: The Case of Sri Lanka [Available at http://www.cbsl.gov.lk/ pics_n_docs/ 02_prs/_docs/lecture /public_ lecture_20081128e.pdf, accessed 25 November 2010]
22. Kumar, S. (2003) An Innovative method to enhance interaction during lecture sessions. Advances in Physiology Education, 27(1): 20–25.
23. Lantolf, J. P. (2006) Language emergence: Implications for applied linguistics – a sociocultural perspective. Applied Linguistics, 27(4): 717–728.
24. Mercer, N. (1995) The Guided Construction of Knowledge: Talk Amongst Teachers and Learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
25. Mercer, N. (2001) Language for teaching a language. In C. Candlin & N. Mercer (Eds.), English Language Teaching in its Social Context: A Reader, (pp. 243-257). New York, NY: Routledge.
26. Mortimer, E. F. & Scott, P. H. (2003) Meaning Making in Secondary Science Classrooms. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
27. Mroz, M., Smith, F. & Hardman, F. (2000) The discourse of the literacy hour. Cambridge Journal of Education, 30(3): 379–390.
28. Myhill, D. (2006) Talk, talk, talk: Teaching and learning in whole class discourse. Research Papers in Education, 21(1): 19–41.
29. Nassaji, H. & Wells, G. (2000) What’s the use of triadic dialogue. Applied Linguistics, 21(3): 376–406.
30. Pedrosa de Jesus, M. H. & da Silva Lopes, B. (2009) Classroom questioning and teaching approaches: A study with Biology undergraduates. In G. Çakmakci & M. F. Taşar (Eds.), Contemporary Science Education Research: Scientific Literacy and Social Aspects of Science, (pp. 33-39)– Paper presented at ESERA 2009 Conference. Istanbul: Pegem A.
31. Pedrosa de Jesus, M. H. & da Silva Lopes, B. (2011) The relationship between teaching and learning conceptions, preferred teaching approaches and questioning practices. Research Papers in Education, 26(2): 223–243.
32. Premawardhena, N. C. (2007) Integrating literature into foreign language teaching: A Sri Lankan perspective. Novitas–ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 1(2): 92–97.
33. Rojas–Drummond, S. & Mercer, N. (2003) Scaffolding the development of effective collaboration and learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 39: 99–111.
34. Sally, O. (1985) Listening comprehension – A lecture–based approach. ELT Journal, 39(3): 187–192.
35. Smith, F., Hardman F., Wall, K. & Mroz, M. (2004) Interactive whole class teaching in the national literacy and numeracy strategies. British Educational Research Journal, 30(3): 395–411.
36. Staarman, J. & Mercer, N. (2010) The Guided construction of knowledge: Talk between teachers and students. In K. Littleton, C. Wood & J. K. Staarman (Eds.) International Handbook of Psychology, (pp. 75-104). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
37. Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (1998) Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3): 320–337. van Dijk, L. A., van Den Berg, G. C. & van Keulen, H. (2001) Interactive lectures in Engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 26(1): 15–28.
38. Vanderstoep, S. W. & Johnston, D. D. (2009) Research Methods for Everyday Life– Blending Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. CA: Jossey–Bass.
39. Verplaetse, L. S. (2000) Mr. Wonder–ful: portrait of a dialogic teacher. In J. K. Hall & L. S. Verplaetse (Eds.), Second and Foreign Language Learning through Classroom Interaction. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 221–241.
40. Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in Society. London: Harvard University.
41. Walsh, S. (2011) Exploring Classroom Discourse Language in Action. Oxon: Routledge.
42. Weeramunda, A. J. (2008) Socio Political Impact of Student Violence and Indiscipline in Universities and Tertiary Education Institutes. Colombo: National Education Commission, Sri Lanka.