Implications of the Classroom discourse model in my study (Essay Sample)

Implications of the Classroom discourse model in my study
It was observed that the S&C model applied in a teaching environment does represent that the participants inadvertently make errors during verbal conversation (Coulthard, 1985:133). The errors can be particularly noticed in exchange numbers XX. The second observation is that the teaching faculties participate in the verbal discussion for 89% of the available time. The 89% participation point is proven by my own talking time in the research but 89% would be on a higher side considering my own participation time Breen, M. (2001).
Due to the 89% of verbal participation done by the faculty it is evident that the faculty has the higher chance of expressing themselves. Furthermore the English language faculties know in advance about the ideal responses to the questions they ask to their students. These questions are known as ‘Display’ questions. Research has proven time and again that most of the questions asked by the teaching faculties are ‘Display’ questions Clark, H., and Carlson, C. (1992).
This is confirmed by own participation in the research that all questions raised by me from the curriculum are ‘Display’ questions. The S&C model represents the fact that the teaching faculties by merit of their own position both begin the exchange and appraises the answers given by the students. This act of beginning the exchange and appraising the answers is also true for my own participation in the research as a faculty.
Further the usage of IRF (Initiation, Response and Follow-up) structure is elaborated in different situations with their purpose. In my study about usage of English in the Korean cooking class the usage of IRF structure can be confirmed. The usage of Framing content such as the word ‘OK’ and the characteristic of the Framing word ‘OK’ also confirms the appropriate usage of IRF structure. The research facts particularly imply the exchange during the teaching session: Initiation, Response, and Feedback. The consistent usage of IRF also confirms the advantage of the IRF exchange in my research work Hewings, M. (1992).
Conclusion
The unique objective of the research was to distinctly and scientifically recognize the organization of conversation that took place during my teaching session. In due course of the research, the S&C model has established its benefit during the lectures lead by the faculty. This also confirms the consideration given by teaching faculties about the successful application of this model to recognize and evaluate their language as a scientific tool.
The model also enables the evaluation of the ‘teaching faculty and student performance’ during each lesson/classroom session. Further this performance can be enhanced or cut down to meet the required standards of the specific educational institute McCarthy, M. (1991).
In addition, the research has allowed me to understand the result of specific prompts and clues in my communication with the students. Accordingly, I can appraise my prompts and cues for their effective usage in the future teaching sessions.
The research made the usage of voice modulation, clearly evident in effectively communicating with the students. That is I could modulate my voice to a lower/upper scale as per the teaching requirements. The research also made the use of ‘scaffolding’ technique clearly evident in evaluating the gradual progress of the student in understanding a teaching session.
Inspite of the highly effective features of the model, it does not really come without some short-comings. Firstly, the model is not very effective in finding out the expected result of a learning session and if there is no student follow-up then the application of our model becomes even more difficult. The S&C model was evidently not so useful in finding out the specific acts in the various learning session, student participation and the resultant student learning that had taken place.
The limitations of the research may have a deteriorating impact on the likelihood that the school will permit me to continue with the same research work. This is important for me as I am planning to conduct the same research work in the near future during the course of pursuing my MBA degree Nunan, D. (1987).
The reason to this short-coming in the research model can be found in its particular structure. The structure does not allow the model to evaluate student-to-student conversation and student feedback to specific initiations made by the teacher. This happens also because of the student conversation in the teaching sessions which is us...