IRF (INITIATION-RESPONSE-FEEDBACK) ON CLASSROOM
INTERACTION FOR COMPUTER STUDENTS IN SMK 1 YAPIM
MEDAN
*
Shilvia Pratiwi
*
Dra.Meisuri, M.A
*Nora Ronita Dewi S.Pd., S.S., M.Hum
ABSTRACT
This study was about IRF (Initiation-Response-Feedback) On Classroom Interaction
For Computer Students in SMK 1 Yapim Medan. The aim of this study were to state
clearly the objectives of the study in relation of the problems posed. The objective
was to describe how the pattern of IRF in the classroom interaction for computer
students. This research used qualitative research. The data were collected in three
ways by observing by video recording, interviewing and questionnaire. The data was
analyzed based on Sinclair and Coulthard theory (1975). The result of this study were
the following (1) The language used by the teacher and the students in the classroom
interaction was not balance. Both teacher and students used bahasa for 70% and the
rest 30% for English. (2) There was the lowest pattern responded by student. It had
20% responses given to the students because the students made many mistakes in
pronouncing some words when they read the text. The teacher feedback was the
dominat pattern in the classroom interaction rather than initiation. It is suggested to
English teacher especially for English teacher who is teaching computer students to
improve students English by by having practice and supporting them to be brave to
speak English.
Keywords: IRF (Initiation-Response-Feedback), Classroom Interaction, Computer
Students
*
Graduate Status
**
Lecturer Status
1
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Classroom interaction is necessary and useful as an educational strategy to
enhance learning. The concept of classroom interaction plays a significant role in the
process of second language learning. Classroom interaction is significant in the
teaching and learning process because it determines the success of the teaching and
learning process and improves students’ language ability and achievement.
Classroom interaction can not be seperated from the teacher and students.
Because teacher and students are the factors that establish classroom interaction. Both
of them must be in balance. Too much teacher talk will make the students passive;
they cannot improve their English. It has the certain pattern It has a certain pattern
one of them is IRF pattern. This pattern stands for initiation-response-feedback, is a
pattern of discussion between the teacher and learners. The teacher initiates, the
learner responds, the teacher gives feedback, commonly known as IRF. This three
part structure was first put forward by Sinclair & Coulthard, 1975 and is known as the
IRF exchange structure.
In Indonesia, English is as Foreign Language and taught from elementary to
high school, the term of learning English, especially for Senior high School student
based on The Teacher Training Material for Implementation of the 2013 Curriculum
in year 2015; English Subject is,
2
"The purpose of learning English language in high schools is to develop the
potential of students to have communicative competencies the text, transactional and
functional discourses, by using various spoken and written English texts coherently
using accurate and acceptable linguistic elements, and various factual and procedural
knowledge, and instill the noble values of the nation's character, in the context of life
in the home, school and community environment ” (Rohim, 2015).
Based on the researcher’s observation to 38 Computer students of SMK 1
Yapim Medan, it was found that the common interaction occured in the classroom
that the students would participated to talk if the lecturer initiated, encouraged and
asks to the students to talk. The teacher opens the interaction by asking questions.
The teacher was dominant in talking to the students. It was found that the students has
problems in speaking. They often became reluctant to participate in a classroom
interaction. For example, there are several students who are not able to express their
idea in English both in written and oral form. Secondly, it seemed that the students
did not have substantial amount of vocabulary mastery and thirdly the students often
gave few respond when the teacher ask the question in the classroom. These problems
caused by the quality of interaction between the teacher and the students, and the
students and the teacher.
By referring to the problem, the writer focused on IRF (Initiation-Response-
Feedback) on Classroom Interaction For Computer In SMK 1 Yapim Medan. The
discussion would be focused on the classroom interaction between teacher and
students whether or not will influence the learning activities and learning outcomes.
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Discourse analysis is not only widely recognized as one of the vastest, but
also the least defined areas in linguistics. One reason for this statement is that our
understanding discourse analysis is based on scholar from a number of academic
disciplines that are actually very different from one to another.
Classroom interaction plays important role in the teaching learning process.
Dagarin (2004) defines classroom interaction can be defined as a two- way process
between the participants in the learning process.
Goronga (2013) asserts that the clasroom interaction makes the students
participating in the teaching and learning process. It means that classroom interaction
encourages the students to involve. What’s more, classroom interaction is not only
about participation in the teaching and learning process and sharing their knowledge
of a material at each other, but it was also about a relationship at each student to other
students in the classroom.
In addition, there are some researches about classroom interaction. First,
Maratmi (2013) studied about An Analysis On Classroom Interaction Using Irf
(Initiation-Response-Follow Up) In Teaching And Learning Process At IxE Grade
Smp N 2 Seririt. The objectives were to describe types of classroom interaction are
used by English teacher and students during teaching and learning process in SMP N
2 Seririt, the functions of each type of classroom interaction during teaching and
learning process in SMP N 2 Seririt. The result of the analysis showed that there were
nine types of Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) theory occurred during the interaction in
4
the class which is known as IRF (initiation-response-follow up). Respectively the
types were as follows: question, inform, invitation, direction, prompt, encouragement,
ignoring, acknowledge and response. The second, Rustandi (2017) concerned An
Analysis of IRF (Initiation-Response-Feedback) On Classroom Interaction in EFL
Speaking Class. This study aim at analyzing the reflection of IRF (Initiation-
Response-Feedback) in speaking class and investigating the dominant sequence
among I, R and F. IRF is a pattern of classroom interaction found by Sinclair and
Coulthard in 1975 that stands for teacher initiation, students’ response and feedback
by the teacher. The result of this research was student’s response becomes the
dominant sequence of IRF in speaking class.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, ANALYSIS, DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS
Methodology
This research was conducted by applying descriptive qualitative design. How
the classroom interaction in teaching of English to Computer students is conducted
would be described in narration and description of the reasons underlying the
performance would be explained. Therefore the qualitative research design was called
by objective explanation description.
The analysis consists of four current flows of activities It was the interactive
model of Miles, Huberman and Saldana (2014), they are ; 1). Data Collection. Data
that are in form of information are gotten by researcher from interview transcript
(result of interviewed with some teachers and students), 2) Data Reduction. The
5
researcher selected the data (the recording conversation in the classroom interaction)
then transcribed it into written up field notes or transcriptions. The irrelevant data
which were not related to research questions were discarded, 3) Data Display. This
step is done by presenting a set of data because the data obtained during the
classroom interaction process for computer students class is in the form of narrative,
thus requiring simplification without reducing its contents, 4). Conclusion. After
displaying the data, a then, sorted and organized the data (transcribed, interview and
questionaire) to get the final conclusion.
Analysis
The first step done by the researcher was analysis. It was conducted by having
observation for 2x45 minutes in teaching learning process for grammar passive voice
and reading comprehension about internet, giving the questionnaire to students and
interviewing the teacher. From the questionnaires, it was found that the students were
difficult to speak English. The result of interview indicated that the teacher had
problem in speaking English in the classroom.
Findings
The findings of this research were first, the teacher and students seldom used English
in the classroom. The teacher responded various answered by using English and
bahasa. the teacher used English and Bahasa to make students understand her lesson
and because the students can’t speak English well. The teacher always tried to speak
English in the classroom interaction. Second, every interaction between teacher and
students started by teacher question. In teaching learning process the teacher always
6
gave questions to the students as initiation. After giving initiation, the students would
respond the teacher questions.
Discussion
The teacher got problem when they had interaction in English with the
students. It was happened because the students are not able to speak English. When
the teacher speaks English, there was no interaction or respond from the students. The
students looked difficult to respond the teacher by using English. The percentage of
using English in the interaction between the teacher and students can be seen below.
Figure 1: The Percentage of Using English in the Interaction Between
the Teacher and Students
Both teacher and students used bahasa for 70% and the rest 30% they use English.
Actually the teacher didn’t face the difficulty in managing the class. Because the
7
students paid attention in studying English. But it was hard for the students to
understand English well.
Every interaction is always initiated by the teacher question and then followed
by the students response by giving opinion toward the teacher question and finally the
teacher gave feedback. The IRF pattern in the classroom interaction for studying
passive voice and reading comprehension including the percentage of type can be
seen in table 1 below.
Table 1 IRF Pattern
NO TYPE OBSERVATION
Passive voice Reading
Comprehension
1. Teacher 35% 30%
Initiaton
2. Students 40% 20%
Response
3. Teacher 25% 50%
Feedback
Total 100% 100%
From the table above, it can be concluded that in the first result was learning
grammar passive voice, the teacher initiation was high but the students response was
higher. The students looked happy and enthusiastic in learming it. Although they had
problem in changing verb but they wanted to try to do the exercises given by the
teacher. And the teacher feedback got in lowest position. So in learning passive voice
the response of the students was dominat in pattern rather than initiation and
feedback.
8
Moreover, the second result of this study showed when students studied
reading comprehension. The lowest pattern was student’s response. It had 20%
responses given to the students. It happened because the students made many
mistakes in pronouncing some words when they read the text. The teacher feedback
was the dominat pattern in the classroom interaction rather than initiation. This
pattern happened because the problems that appeared from the features of the text,
such there were unfamiliar vocabularies which were used in the text, unfamiliar
content of the text which make the students were not interested to read, the
appearance of an ambiguous pronoun which was confusing for the students.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
Conclusions
1. The language used by the teacher and the students in the classroom interaction
was not balance. The students seldom use English. They used bahasa for 70%
and 30% used English. It is hard for the students to understand English well.
it happened because the students had limited vocabulary and they also were
afraid to make mistake when they spoke English.
2. The lowest pattern was student’s response. It had 20% responses given to the
students because the students made many mistakes in pronouncing some
words when they read the text. The teacher feedback was the dominat pattern
in the classroom interaction rather than initiation. This pattern happened
because the students faced unfamiliar vocabularies which were used in the
9
text, unfamiliar content of the text which make the students are not interested
to read.
Suggestion
1. It is better if English teacher who is teaching computer students to stimulate
students to use English in the teaching learning process. The classroom
interaction between teacher and students can be interesting if there is two
ways communication. But if the the teacher too dominant, of course the
students will be passive in the class. And the teacher should improve the
students English by having practice and supporting them to be brave to speak
English.
2. The students should improve their English and dare to speak up English in
the classroom. If they make mistake when they speak English, the teacher will
be kindly to improve their mistakes.
3. The next researcher should to conduct further studies about classroom
discourse based on Sinclair and Coulthard model which will be very useful
reference to the teachers’ and students’ need in classroom interaction.
10
REFERENCES
Brown, H. Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principle: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy. New York : Longman
Dagarin, Mateza. 2004. Classroom Interaction and Communication Strategies In
Learning English as a Foreign Language. Sloven: Sloven University.
Dosma M.P.2017. An analysis Classroom Interaction in English Subject At Senior
High School. Genre Jurnal. Volume 2 No.1 2017.
Friska O. 2017. Teacher Talk In English Classroom Interaction Using Sinclair And
Coulthard Model. Journal of English Language Teaching of FBS Unimed, Vol
7, No.1, 2018.
Ginarsih, Sukirlan & Supriyadi. 2013. An Analysis Of Classroom Interaction At The
Second Year Of Smp 17 Gedongtataan. Unila Journal of English Teaching (U-
JET), Vol.2, No.4 2013
Miles,M.B, Huberman,A.M, dan Saldana,J. 2014. Qualitative Data Analysis, A
Methods Sourcebook, Edition 3. USA: Sage Publications. Terjemahan Tjetjep
Rohindi Rohidi, UI-Press
Nurul Wulanda.2017. Examining EFL Classroom Interaction Based on Sinclair and
Coulthard Model.Register, Volume 1. No.2.2017.
Rohim, F. 2015. Materi Pelatihan Guru Implementasi Kurikulum 2013 Jenjang
SMA/SMK Tahun 2015: Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Kementrian
Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Rustandi, Andi (2013). Meaning negotiation between teachers and students in
fledgling international standardized school. International journal of English
and Education. Vol.2, Issue 3, July 2013.
Rustandi, Andi and Ande Husni Mubarok.2017. Analysis of IRF on classroom
interaction in EFL Speaking Class. Edulite Jurnal, Volume 2 No.1, February
2017.
Sinclair, J. M., & Coulthard, M. 1975. Toward an Analysis of Discourse: The English
Used by Teachers and Pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
11
