Abstract
The uniqueness of the Language Classroom and its complexity raises a need for foreign language teachers to develop necessary skills and knowledge to observe, analyse and evaluate their classroom discourse. Hence, interactional awareness of language teachers is an integral part of pedagogical and practical knowledge. In this article, the Self-Evaluation of Teacher Talk framework (SETT) proposed by Walsh (2006) will be discussed in detail and its contribution to critical reflective practice will be probed. The extracts are taken from 12 hours of tape recording of a university General English course and supported by a teacher’s diary for analysis. The results demonstrate that although the SETT framework is representative and useful, setting and institutional requirements should not be ignored. This article has implications not only for developing critical reflective practice for in-service teachers but also for teacher training.
Keywords
Introduction
Any attempt to analyse communication in the L2 class must take two factors into account: first the uniqueness and second the complexity of the setting (Walsh, 2006). As Thornbury (2000) puts it, Language Classrooms are language classrooms, and for the teacher to monopolize control of discourse, while possibly appropriate to other content classes, would seem to deny language learners’ access to what they most need: opportunities for real language use. Kumaravadivelu (1999) posits that:
What actually happens there [in the classroom] largely determines the degree to which desired learning outcomes are realized. The task of systematically observing, analyzing and understanding classroom aims and events therefore becomes central to any serious educational enterprise (Kumaravadivelu, 1999: 454).
As a first step to understand communication in a second language class, Walsh (2006) presents a description of four principle characteristics of L2 class discourse, largely from the teacher’s perspective: control of patterns of communication, elicitation techniques, repair strategies and modifying speech to learners. Then he goes on with three approaches to investigate L2 class interaction: interaction analysis, discourse analysis and conversation analysis (CA). With their roots planted in behavioural psychology, a huge range of observation instruments has proliferated since the 1960s and 1970s. According to Brown and Rogers (2002), over 200 different observation instruments now exist. When discourse analytical approaches are used in isolation, they are guided by principles of structural functional linguistics (Walsh, 2006). Both these approaches follow a fairly rigid, systematic line of enquiry, emphasizing the importance of creating ‘order’ from discourse by allocating utterances to pre-determined categories, either pedagogic or linguistic. However, the conversation analysis approach is more naturalistic and ethnographic and has a number of features that sets it apart from the more quantitative, static and product-oriented techniques. According to this view, interaction is, as Walsh puts it, context-shaped and context-renewing.
Conversation analysis, as a social science research tradition, has gained much interest and increasing application in the fields of language learning and language teaching over the last ten years (Seedhouse, 2005). There are now a range of publications which explore this area, like teaching languages for specific purposes; language teaching materials design; language proficiency assessment; language classroom interaction; NS–NNS (native/non-native speaker) talk; code-switching; and teacher education (Seedhouse, 2005; Sert and Seedhouse, 2011).
CA can shed light on the fact that the well-organized structure of conversation does not mean that social and human interaction takes place spontaneously without the influence of participants’ feelings, thoughts and attitudes (micro-level) and socio-cultural and economic contextual factors (macro-level). Such critical pedagogical perspectives would be empowering, raising the cognitive and meta-cognitive skills, and hence improving social and cultural awareness (Al_Amiri, 2011).
Following Firth and Wagner’s (1997) proposal for conceptualizing Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research, a growing number of publications arose, both for and against the implications of CA-for-SLA. Firth and Wagner argued for sensitivity to contextual and interactional aspects of language use and an adoption of a more emic and participant-relevant perspective towards SLA research. Borg (2011) demonstrates in his summary of Second Language Teacher Education (SLTE) that there is a lack of juxtaposition between findings on teachers’ perceptions and their actual classroom practices in situ. Conversation Analysis provides a systematic understanding of how talk-in-interaction is constructed based on how interlocutors orient to one another’s prior turns-at-talk (Fagan, 2012). For Second Language Teacher Education (SLTE), therefore, CA would prove to be a valuable addition and complement to the already existent forms of data gathering commonly used in this strand of research as a way to further enhance understanding of teacher’s classroom practices as they connect to language learning opportunities in the classroom.
The emic perspective in CA has been attributed one of the primary roles in its implications for Applied Linguistic research (Markee, 2000, 2008; Seedhouse, 2004, 2005). Some recent studies (e.g. Seedhouse, 2008; 2010; Walsh, 2006) have highlighted the need for a CA approach to demonstrate the problems in classroom interactional practice. This approach has consequently informed the teachers on how a fine grained micro analysis of their discourse may be used to point out the troubles with tasks-in-process.
SETT Framework
To help teachers describe the classroom interaction of their lessons and foster an understanding of the interactional process, Walsh (2006) designed a framework called ‘Self-Evaluation of Teacher Talk (SETT)’. This descriptive framework is intended as a means to an end rather than the end itself, constructed to facilitate understanding, and not to code every interaction. Hence it is representative, rather than comprehensive. It relates pedagogic purpose to language use, enabling teachers to identify recurrent segmental patterns or structures.
Following Seedhouse (1996, cited in Walsh, 2001), there are four classroom micro contexts, referred to as ‘modes’ by Walsh, namely:
Managerial Mode
Materials Mode
Skills and Systems Mode
Classroom Context Mode
Each mode requires specific interactional features drawing upon the pedagogical goals.
Walsh maintains that modes are not static and invariant. There are movements from one mode to another (mode switching), and between main and secondary modes (mode side sequences). A teacher’s use of language may be mode convergent, where pedagogic goals and language are congruent, facilitating learning opportunities, or mode divergent, where inconsistencies in pedagogic goals and interactional features hinder opportunities for learning. Occurrences of mode convergence or divergence may be accidental in that teachers do not consciously plan their language use, or to make language use more deliberate.
This framework might be applied to a range of contexts; it is straightforward to develop an understanding of the ‘interactional architecture’ (Seedhouse, 2004) of each setting once the instrument has been applied and mastered. The emerged picture has tremendous diversity, portraying the inextricable link between language uses and teaching goals. Essentially what SETT permits is an enhanced understanding of the dialogic nature of the classroom discourse and the extent to which meaning-making is fundamental to learning and orchestrating learning-oriented discourse. It can be used to enhance a teacher’s awareness of the complex interrelationship between language, interaction and learning.
It is argued that SETT demonstrates ‘fitness for purpose’ and allows teachers to access the discourse of their class in a number of ways. First, it equips teachers with appropriate tools to analyse the interactional process and it can be used in any context to promote understanding. Second, it provides teacher-participants with an appropriate metalanguage to describe interactional processes. Third, it allows teachers to construct understandings of the complex relationship between classroom mode and learning opportunity. This argument rests on the principle that teachers’ use of language should be evaluated according to the agenda of the moment, the unfolding pedagogic goals and the intended learning outcomes. Hence, there is a need for all teachers to become aware of the importance of using appropriate teacher talk in relation to desired learning outcomes. Quality of the language being used and the context to which it is suited are considered.
SETT and Critical Reflective Practice
According to Bolton (2010) reflective practice involves paying critical attention to the practical values and theories that inform everyday actions, by examining practice reflectively and reflexively which can lead to developmental insight. A key idea is that experience alone does not lead to learning but that ‘considered and deliberative’ reflection on experience is essential (Loughran, 2002).
One of the stated reasons for using the SETT framework is to assess the extent to which teachers are able to increase their awareness of their talk and its effects on learning over a relatively short period of time. By ‘awareness’ a more conscious use of language is meant; noticing the effect of interaction, understanding that teachers and learners jointly create language opportunities but where key responsibility lies with the teacher, realization of an appropriate teacher talk adjusted not only to the level but also to pedagogic goals. Assessing awareness may seem difficult, hence a framework like SETT can be of great help. Walsh witnessed evidence of changes in the level of awareness by the teachers’ increased use of metalanguage, critical self-evaluation and more conscious interactive decision-making after applying his framework.
On the whole, it can be summarized that foreign language teachers need to develop the necessary skills and knowledge to observe, analyse and evaluate their own classroom discourse. In this sense, language teachers’ interactional awareness is an integral part of pedagogical and practical knowledge. Now, it is of interest to know how the SETT framework is applicable in the present context and its effect on critical reflective practice.
Methodology
The data are extracts taken from tape recordings of 12 sessions of university General English courses and supported by a teacher’s diary for further reflection. The teacher who participated in this study has 7 year’s experience in teaching General English. The setting is an EFL course, involving two universities in Isfahan, Iran, with two EGP courses, with more than 40 students each. Generally, in such courses, the aim is to make the students ready for the specialized English courses and the main emphasis is on reading comprehension.
The transcription system, adapted from Tannen (2005) and Hutchby and Woofit (1998), is presented in Appendix II. The SETT framework is applied to the classroom discourse with more focus on the relevant pedagogic goals and interactional features.
Results and Discussions
Application of SETT Framework
Here, there is an attempt to identify the four modes (managerial, materials, skills and systems and classroom context mode), focusing on the interactional features that characterize each mode, and relating the use of language to intended learning outcomes; and presenting a discussion of the role of SETT in critical reflective practice.
Identification of Modes
Managerial Mode
The pedagogic goals of Managerial Mode are:
To transmit information related to management of learning.
To organize the physical conditions for learning to take place.
To refer learners to specific materials.
To introduce or conclude an activity.
To move to and from alternative forms of learning: lockstep (whole class), pair- and group-work, or individual.
The interactional features that characterize the Managerial Mode are:
A single extended teacher turn, frequently in the form of an explanation or instruction.
The use of transitional markers (alright, now, look, ok, etc.) to focus attention or indicate the beginning or end of a lesson stage.
Confirmation checks (is that clear? Do you understand? Have you got that? Does everyone know what to do? etc.).
The absence of learner contributions.
Extract 1 is an example of the Managerial Mode when the teacher wanted to start the new session, reminding students of what they have done in the previous session and what they were about to do. She also tried to attract their attention by ensuring that the topic was of interest to them.
Extract 1
1. T. Ok, last session we were done by unit 8 … Now .. we are going to learn the vocabulary of unit 9. Here are some words that apply to some of you, so learn them.. It is about 2. L. = We 3. T. ‘so.. let’s go through the words.
An extended teacher talk in 1 can be seen where the ground is set for the new lesson and the lesson is introduced which fulfills goals (b) and (d). Learners are referred to specific material in 3. Transitional markers such as ok, so are applied. Transactional markers like all right, ok, so signal the end of one part of the lesson and alert learners to the fact that the lesson has moved on and the pedagogic goals have been realigned with a shift in focus to a new activity. These discourse markers function as punctuation marks in written text, or intonation patterns in spoken texts and are essential for understanding.
In line with Walsh, it can be seen that Managerial Mode occurs most often at the beginning of lessons. When this happens, the teacher’s main concern is to ‘locate’ the learning temporarily and pedagogically or spatially. Once learning has been located, learners are invited to participate: I know some of you love shopping and spend a lot of time shopping, don’t you? Locating learning is an important first step in building a main context; hence, in many respects, Managerial Mode functions as a support to the other three modes. It can be said to be an ‘enabling mode’ (Walsh, 2006: 69). This mode can also be used as a link between two stages of a lesson. This is demonstrated in extract 2 which depicts a situation where the teacher wanted to make a smooth transition to the grammar section despite learners’ unwillingness.
Extract 2
(Teacher writes some sentences on the board) 4. T. ‘Ok.. now look at these sentences. What [can be the point? 5. L. 6. T. =Don’t worry.. that’s easy.. you already know it.
The principal pedagogic goal of Managerial Mode can be said to be the management of learning, including setting up a task, summarizing or providing feedback on one particular stage of a lesson.
Materials Mode
In this Materials Mode, pedagogic goals and language use centre on materials being used. The identified pedagogic goals are as follows:
To provide language practise around a specific piece of material.
To elicit learner responses in relation to the material.
To check and display answers.
To clarify as and when necessary.
To evaluate learner contributions.
To extend learner contributions.
The principal interactional features of Materials Mode are:
The IRF sequence typically predominates and is closely managed by the teacher.
Display questions are used to check understanding and elicit responses.
Teacher feedback is form-focused, attending to ‘correctness’ rather than content.
Repair is used to correct errors and give feedback examples.
The teacher may scaffold learner contributions.
Learners may be afforded more or less interactional space according to the type of activity.
Accordingly, it is believed that very little interactional space or choice of topic are afforded since interaction is organized exclusively around the material. Pedagogically, the focus can be interpreted as providing vocabulary practice around a specific piece of material. Key items of vocabulary are elicited, confirmed and displayed by the teacher echoes of a previous contribution. In this mode teacher echo serves a useful function, confirming a contribution and amplifying it for other learners. However, its function may be less useful as there are clear instances where it can hinder learner involvement. Extract 3 is an example of Materials Mode in which the teacher read a passage and asked comprehension questions accordingly. She also tried to clarify vocabulary by explaining the word structure and its definition.
Extract 3
7. T. … English, French, Russian and Spanish. The secretariat uses two working languages.. English and French. ‘So.. what’s the MAIN IDEA here? 8. L. language of United Nations 9. T. which languages are used by the secretariat? 10. L. English, French and Russian 11. T. no.. the secretariat?= 12. L. yes 13. T. no.. just 2 languages.. English and French… two working languages 14. L. aha (teacher going back) 15. T. ‘so.. six official languages of the united nations in intergovernmental meeting. You know intergovernmental? Government is dowlat (in Persian).. inter makes it compound, intergovernmental is the adjective and … documents: Arabic, Chinese, English, Russian, French and Spanish.
Through this extract goals (a), (b), (c), (d) and (f) are met. In 9 the teacher tries to elicit learners’ responses in relation to the material which is in line with goal (b). In 15 language practice is provided in relation to the text (goal a) and the teacher checks for comprehension and clarifies the lesson, thereby fulfilling goals (c) and (d). In 9–15 goal (f) is met by the teacher trying to extend learners’ contribution. In 11 and 13 instances of repair exist.
While turn-taking and topic choice in this mode are largely determined by the material, there are varying degrees of association, evidenced in extract 4 and 5. Extract 4 shows a comprehension exercise where students were given a task from the book asking who might have said those sentences, with students trying to negotiate the answer. Extract 5 depicts a grammar exercise where students read examples about conditional sentences from the book and the teacher explaining how conditionals work.
Extract 4
L1. (reading from the book) My parents usually tell me to speak with the school counselor. Koji said.=
16. L2. NO, James. 17. L3. Koji 18. (Students having different ideas, laughing) 19. T. ‘ok.. who says Koji?= 20. =L4. I 21. T. ok.. justify it.. Say why.. why Koji? 22. L4. I can’t in English. 23. T. just try it. 24. L4. (justifying in mother tongue) 25. T. yeah, ‘right. You make mistake as the parents have told him to do so.= 26. =L1. I tell he listens to his family. 27. T. To whom does he go.. finally? 28. L1. First family, then counselor. 29. T. every time he goes to the family and they say go to the ‘counselor? Or once they have told him to go to the counselor? And he ‘always then on goes to the counselor. 30. L1. Are you sure? 31. T. YEAH (laugh)
In this extract there is increased student participation and turn-taking.
Extract 5
33. L1. if I had known that you are so sensitive, I would have kept silence.= 34. =T. ‘so, because I had not known I had not kept silence.= 35. =L1. Type 1. 36. T. no.. why type 1? Type 3. 37. L2. ‘ Are 38. T. what are the main verbs? Look at the main verbs 39. L1. Are 40. T. They are ‘know and ‘keep. ‘Are is inside the main sentence. 41. L1. So .. type 3
Extract 5 illustrated more frequent turn-taking, as evidenced by 37 and another learner. They are provided with scaffolding by 38 and correction carried out in 36–40.
Skills and Systems Mode
In the Skills and System Mode pedagogic goals are closely related to providing language practise in relation to a particular language system (phonology, grammar, vocabulary, discourse) or language skill (reading, listening, writing, and speaking). Teaching objectives may also relate to the development of specific learner strategies.
The key pedagogic goals are:
To enable learners to produce strings of correct utterances.
To enable learners to manipulate the target language.
To provide corrective feedback.
To provide learners with practice in essential sub-skills (e.g. skimming, listening for gist).
To display correct answers.
The principal interactional features associated with the Skills and Systems Mode are:
The use of direct repair.
The use of scaffolding.
Extended teacher turns.
Display questions used for eliciting target language.
Teacher echo used to display responses.
Clarification requests.
Form-focused feedback.
Typically, interaction in this mode follows a lockstep organization and the IRF (Initiation, Response, Follow up) sequence frequently occurs. Turn taking and topic selection are determined by the target language and the responsibility for managing turns usually lies with the teacher. Pedagogic goals are more accuracy-based than fluency-based and the teachers’ concern is to get learners to produce strings of accurate linguistic forms and manipulate the target language. Direct repair and scaffolding are prevalent. Scaffolding as an essential activity, assists learners to express themselves and acquire new language. Extract 6 is an instance of the System and Skills Mode in which a comprehension question, containing an error, led to some explanation on the English cardinal numbers. The teacher, after rectifying the error, guided the learners through the system, and provided scaffolds until they finally learn the accurate system.
Extract 6
42. L. What does ‘they refer to in two nd paragraph? 43. T. You should say ‘second. 44. L. Second 45. OK, let me tell you about numbers… we have ‘numbers, er two kinds of numbers. Look at here. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 …10, 100…..Ordinal and cardinal.. first.. second.. third.. fourth.. then? 46. L. fifth 47. T. and? 48. L. tenth, one hundredth. 40. T. and the case is that you just write the number and a th index for all of the numbers except for 1, st; 2,nd; 3, rd 49. L. ‘so why they say fifth? 50. T. YEAH, some changes for five too.. any way they write 5 and then the index
In 43 there is direct repair and in 45–48 there are scaffolding, helping the learners to remember or guess the correct form. Goals (b), (c) and (e) have been met in this extract. With corrective feedback provided, the learners are able to manipulate the target language and arrive at the correct answers. The combination of scaffolding and direct repair enables learners to attend to specific features of their interlanguage while keeping the interaction smooth; in line with teacher’s pedagogic goals and the agenda of the moment. Getting learners to ‘notice’ the patterns and identify relationships is a central goal of the Skills and Systems Mode. Little attention is given to meaning or communication as the prime objective is to enable learners to understand and produce target forms.
Extract 7 is another example of the Skills and Systems Mode whereby the teacher tried to get the students to produce strings of correct utterances (goal a) and display correct answers (goal e) in an extended teacher turn by resorting to contrastive analysis.
Extract 7
51. L. I’m agree with Monika. 52. T. ‘ok, pay attention to the verb ‘agree. You have to learn something about it. In Persian we say I ‘am agree but in English that’s not correct. You have to say I agree. It doesn’t need TO BE… ‘And for question.. do you agree? With auxiliary ‘do, for negative what do we say?
Unlike Materials Mode where language practice revolves around a piece of material, the Skills and Systems Mode evolves from teacher prompts and is managed by the teacher. Indeed learner contributions typically go through the teacher for evaluation, confirmation or repair. This can be observed by comparing extracts 5 and 7. It is believed that patterns of turn taking in the Skills and Systems Mode are strongly influenced by the extent to which the teachers’ methodology is inductive (where students work more independently) or deductive (where teachers maintain tight control of the interaction).
Classroom Context Mode
The principal pedagogic goals in this mode can be summarized as follows:
To enable learners to talk about feelings, emotions, experience, attitudes, reactions, personal relationships.
To establish a context.
To activate mental schemata.
To promote oral fluency practice.
In Classroom Context Mode in an EFL setting, the interaction is initiated and sustained from interactional opportunities that emerge from the complex and diverse range of experiences and cultural backgrounds that the learners bring to the classroom.
The principal interactional features that can be identified in Classroom Context Mode are:
Extended learner turns; the speech exchange system is frequently managed by learners themselves with little or no teacher involvement.
Relatively short teacher turns.
Direct repair; repair is only used to fix a breakdown in the interaction.
Content feedback, focusing on message, not form.
Extended use of referential questions, rather than display questions.
Scaffolding may be used to help learners express their ideas.
Request for clarification and confirmation checks.
In Classroom Context Mode, the management of turns and topics is determined by the context, the communicable potential of the L2 classroom itself, and the authentic resources for interaction it has to offer. The principle role of the teacher is to listen and support the interaction which frequently takes on the appearance of a naturally occurring conversation. However, it is not uncommon for teachers to retain control of the interaction and interrupt the flow of conversation. Extract 8, from seemingly higher level students, is an example of Context Mode. The context is brought up by somebody sneezing loudly and others commenting on the advantages and disadvantages of sneezing loudly.
Extract 8
53. T. Bless you.= 54. =L2. She sneez always too loud.= 55. =L3. It is good to sneeze loud. Control is not good. It ‘must be free. It is a natural reflex of body, …. ‘No control good. 56. L4. Like a bomb? Sneez too loud isn’t good too. It may hurt that person’s ears. …public sneeze is different from ‘personal sneez. And a single sneeze send about 100,000 germs into air, … ‘control is important
In this extract, teacher’s turn is restricted to mentioning just the linguistic aspect (53); learners speak freely, in line with goal (a) in the context provided by the teacher (goal b). However, the teacher refrains from correcting the learners (54, 55, and 56) and the interaction is successful.
The defining characteristic of Classroom Context Mode is interactional space: extended learner turns predominate as participants co-construct the discourse. Error correction is minimal and the goal is to maintain genuine communication rather than display linguistic knowledge. Appendix I further presents the interactional features of each of the modes.
Points to Consider about Modes
One mode may last as long as a class time with brief departures to other modes. In the case of present data the Material Mode is predominant, with departures to Managerial Mode or Skills and Systems Mode whereas Walsh believes Classroom Mode and Material Mode to be frequently sustained for extended periods, while Managerial Mode and Skills and Systems Mode tend to have shorter durations. This may be due to contextual differences and institutional requirements. The context of the present data requires the material to be covered and all the class interaction revolves around it. Extract 9 shows how Material Mode is dominant and other modes are incorporated into it. The teacher was doing exercises based on the materials prepared the book, simultaneously managing the class by asking for order, defining words, clarifying misunderstandings and providing English equivalents.
Extract 9
57. T. ok, exercise two; replace the underlined word with a synonym from the text.. Er.. Ms. A read the first. 58. L (a). … They publish a special magazine every week. Magazine means modiriyat (wrong Native language equivalent)?= 59. =T. ‘no, that is management, magazine is journal. 60. T. You two, any problem? Today you seem too restless. 61. L. (laugh) 62. L (a) …. Periodical? 63. T. ‘yeah, ok, number 2, Ms. b 64. L (b) the only entry to the farmhouse is across the field. …. Er… I haven’t done ‘this one. 65. T. ok, entry, … way to enter 66. L ….. (b) access? 67. T. YEAH, and ‘field is a piece of land. 68. L (c ) what is shekast (demanding the English equivalent) 69. T. fail
In 57, Managerial Mode predominates and directs the students’ attention to the material and establishing the context. Fifty-nine is a corrective repair and the interaction advances as in 60 where order and silence are called upon, displaying a Managerial Mode that is more prevalent in crowded courses like the ones in this investigation. Scaffolding the learner in the Material Mode is seen in and 66 provided extended wait-time for the learner to get the answer. Sixty-seven to 69 are Skills and System Mode, explaining relevant vocabulary. All of these are done related to the material.
As is confirmed by Walsh himself, there are difficulties in identifying Managerial Mode, possibly because it functions more like a sub-mode, supporting the other modes, making their implementation easier. Modes do not simply happen; they are co-constructed by teachers and learners, with the teacher taking most of the responsibility for directing the progression of discourse according to the desired learning outcome. Hence, the managerial role of the teacher is dominant.
SETT and Critical Reflective Practice
In the following what is discussed is the evidence of changes in the level of awareness by the teacher’s increased use of metalanguage, critical self-evaluation and more conscious interactive decision-making after applying the SETT framework. These are primarily based on the instructor’s diary.
Use of Metalanguage
As expected, in the present study the teacher’s use of metalanguage increased after using the framework. This can be evident from extract 10, taken from the teacher’s diary. The instructor believes scaffolding to be essential in all modes, particularly in the Skills and Systems Mode, so that students would be able to come up with the right answer and preventing the other students from being confused.
Extract 10
Scaffolding plays an important role in all modes, especially in skills and systems modes learners need to be scaffolded. As they are required to do the exercises before, here scaffolding is not so essential, however in doing exercises they must be given corrective feedback or repair immediately or the rest of the class will be confused.
Critical Self-evaluation
Extract 11 from the teacher’s diary shows her evaluation of herself. A balance in using the mother tongue and L2 is called upon. This is mainly due to the context in which this balance is required. In the university context, learners are not so eager to speak in L2. In fact, their pedagogic requirements force them to concentrate more on content and grammar than on conversational skills. Hence, explanations on content and clarifications are demanded which are sometimes mandated through L1. Also, the proficiency level of learners plays a crucial role. Less proficient learners use less L2 for communication.
Extract 11
Perhaps I should find a way to decrease learners’ use of mother tongue. I’m still dubious about it. Sometimes they really need explanations, perhaps in the material mode explaining in their mother tongue is ok, but in class context mode… well, they simply don’t talk, or say it in their mother tongue.
As the courses are crowded and the main emphasis is on reading comprehension, little communication practises take place; even for that amount learners usually resort to their mother tongue via translanguaging as a dynamic process through which multilingual language users mediate complex social and cognitive activities by strategic employment of multiple semiotic resources. When languages are not parallel, as in English and Persian in the present context, learners use their mother tongue, Persian, as simply ‘languaging’ which is a cognitive process of negotiating and producing meaningful, comprehensible output as part of language learning. Pennycook (2014) believes languages are not pre-given entities but sets of possibilities that emerge from practices, discourses, registers and genres. Learners should be brought up as resourceful speakers and language classes provide the best opportunities to engage in language practise, to draw on linguistic repertoires, take up styles, partake in discourse and do genres. In the same vein, higher use of the mother tongue by the less proficient learners can be attributed to a lack of resources in the target language. Hence to give breadth and depth to learners’ resources language should be seen ‘not as an object in the curriculum but as an activity’ (Pennycook, 2014:14) and language courses as providing a medium to that practice.
More Conscious Interactive Decision-making
Interactional decisions can have an adverse or positive effect on learning opportunities and teachers need to be sensitized to this. Within the parameters of the SETT framework, there is scope in the diary to explain why certain decisions were taken and analyse their effects on any stage of a lesson. Extract 12 illustrates this decision making process by the teacher.
Extract 12
In all modes I should be aware that the class does not go far. That is the management mode should always be present. In material mode, it makes the flow of mode smoother, embedded in the material mode is management mode. In skills and systems mode I can go as far as I get sure the learners have learnt the point. Any way, it is a dominant mode at the same time of being sub-ordinate to which I should frequently turn. It is highly dependent on the class and the learners.
Conclusion
Despite deviant instances of mode application, as Walsh himself has mentioned in mode switching, mode side sequence and mode divergence, the SETT framework is beneficial in raising the interactional awareness of language teachers and enhancing pedagogical and practical knowledge.
However, two main points are worth mentioning as a result of the present study. Firstly, mode application is context-based. In contexts where material coverage is essential, the dominant mode is clearly the Material Mode, leaving too little time for others, especially for Class Context Mode. In fact, the proficiency level and the number of students in a class do not leave much time for interaction, extended learner turns and application of Classroom Context Mode. Meanwhile, though Managerial Mode is not the dominant mode, as the Material Mode always prevails (more than about three fourth for the time in the present study, the classes evolved around Material Mode), class management plays a crucial role.
Also, some modifications in SETT can be helpful to enable learners locate their activity more clearly. For instance a pedagogic goal of the Managerial Mode is to transmit information. This information will help learners develop skills in general and so may interact with the Skills and Systems Mode. Also, when the teacher is explaining the new words, both Material Mode and Skills and Systems Mode can be at play. This clarification of feature of modes or even combining modes may help with the problem of mode deviances.
This article has implications not only for developing critical reflective practice for in-service teachers but also for teacher training. Classroom discourse informed by conversation-analysis shows the teachers how a fine grained micro analysis of their discourse may be used to point out the troubles with tasks-in-process. As a result therefore this can be properly applied in teacher training to enhance their critical reflective practice via the use of metalanguage, critical self-evaluation and conscious interactive decision making. Also for in-service teachers, reflective practice can be an important tool in practice-based professional learning settings where individuals learn from their own professional experiences, rather than from formal teaching or knowledge transfer, which may be the most important source of personal professional development and improvement. Furthermore it is also an important way to bring together theory and practice.
Extended scope in the present research in terms of the variety of settings (institutional vs. academic), the number of instructors and learners’ participants and an increase in the quantity of extracts would be more illuminating and helpful in clarifying mode features. Also qualitatively, more on teacher’s critical reflective practice can be probed, particularly using recall sessions.
Footnotes
Appendix
Key to Transcription Conventions*.
| Symbol | Definition |
|---|---|
|
|
noticeable pause or break in rhythm (less than half second) |
|
|
|
|
|
marks primary stress |
|
|
marks secondary stress |
|
|
marks emphatic stress |
|
|
mark very emphatic stress |
|
|
mark sentence-final falling intonation |
|
|
marks rising intonation |
|
|
Analyst’s notes |
|
|
latches |
|
|
overlap |
These conventions are adapted from Tannen, 2005 with minor changes being the last three items are not from Tannen, 2005, but from Hutchby and Woofit, 1998.
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.