Main Article Content
This descriptive analytical on-going study examines the engagement of the Indonesian high school students as they participated in the classroom activity, particularly in whole class discussion settings. The engagement is investigated in three measures, the word count, unprovoked student talk and turn count. While the focus is on student talk, teacher talk will also be measured with the purpose of examining the interaction and to serve as a comparison to the measures of the student talk. The participants will be 380 students of grade 10-12 who enrolled in a private High School. Data was extracted from the recording of 30 meeting sessions. The engagement was ascertained based on an analysis of transcripts from the classroom observation. And from these transcripts, the three the measures of engagement, word count, unprovoked student talk and turn count were counted. The findings of this study were the ratio of 5:1 classroom talk where the teacher dominated the classroom talk, and the low engagement in terms of unprovoked student talk and turn count in the whole class lecture and discussion settings. Recommendation on classroom procedure was provided.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Bygate, M., & Samuda, V. (2007). Tasks in language learning. Palgrave Macmillan
Bygate, M., & Samuda, V. (2009). Creating pressure in task pedagogy: The joint roles of field, purpose, and engagement within the interaction approach. In A. Mackey & C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on interaction: Second language research in honour of Susan M. Gass (pp. 90–116). Taylor and Francis/Routledge.
Cavanagh, R. F. (2015). A unified model of student engagement in classroom learning and classroom learning environment: one measure and one underlying construct. Learning Environment Research, 18(2). DOI:101007/s10984-015-9188-z
Christenson, S., Reschly A. L. & Wylie, C. (Eds) (2012). Handbook of rsesearch on student engagement. Springer.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. London: Sage.
Davis, M. H. & McPartland, J. M. (2012). High school reform and student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly & Wylie, C. (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (p. 515-540). Springer.
Dincer, A., Yesilyurt, S.., Noels, K. A., & Vargas-Lascano, D. I. V. (2019). Self-determination and classroom engagement of EFL learners: A mixed-methods study of the self-system model of motivational development. Sage Open, 9(2), p. 1-15.
Dörnyei, Z. & Kormos, J. (2000). The role of individual and social variables in task performance. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 275-300.
Eccles, J. & Wang, M. T. (2012). Part I Commentary: So what is student engagement anyway? In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly & Wylie, C. (Eds.) Handbook of research on student engagement (p. 133-147). New York: Springer.
Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, p. 117–142.
Finn, J. D. (1993). School engagement and students at risk. National Center for Educational Statistics, U.S. Department of Education (NCES 93 470).
Finn, J. D. & Zimmer, K. S. (2012). Student engagement. In S L. Christenson.,A.L. Reschly, C. Wylie (Eds). Handbook of research on student engagement (p.97-132). Springer.
Finn, J. D., Pannozzo, G. M., & Voelkl, K. E. (1995). Disruptive and inattentive-withdrawn behavior and achievement among fourth graders. The Elementary School Journal, 95, p. 421–454.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N., & Hyun, H. (2015). How to design and evaluate research in education. (9th Ed.) New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Fredricks, J. A. & McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: a comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly & Wylie, C. (Eds.) Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763-782). Springer.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–109.
Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), p. 148-162.
Gettinger, M. & Walter, M. J. (2012). Classroom strategies to enhance academic engaged time. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly & Wylie, C. (Eds.) Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 653-674). Springer.
Glanville, J. L., & Wildhagen, T. (2007). The measurement of school engagement: Assessing dimensionality and measurement invariance across race and ethnicity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67(6), p. 1019–1041.
Hughes. J. N., & Zhang, D. (2006). Effects of the structure of classmates’ perceptions of peers’ academic abilities on children’s perceived cognitive competence, peer acceptance, and engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, p. 400-419.
Idris, S. (2016). The impact of globalization, language policy, and language learning on identity construction: An ethnographic case study of a high school community in Bima, Indonesia. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1797941900). Https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1797941900?accountid=10382
Johnson, E. B. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning. California: Corwin Press.
Kenny, M.E., Blustein, D.L, Haase, R., Jackson, J., & Perry, J.C. (2006). Setting the stage: Career development and the student engagement process. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 53(2), p. 272- 279.
Kirkpatrick, A. A. (1995). Language, culture, and methodology. In Tickoo, M. L. (Ed.), Language and culture in multilingual societies. Singapore: SEAMEO, Anthology.
Lauder, A. (2008). The status and function of English in Indonesia: A review of key factors. Makara, Sosial Humaniora, 12(1), 9-20.
Lo Bianco, J. (2012). National language revival movements: Reflection from India, Israel, Indonesia and Ireland. In B. Spolsky (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of language policy. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Lotulung, M. S. D. & Wullur, B. (2017) Teacher Directive Discourse and Active Learning in Indonesian High Schools. Journal of Modern Education Review, 220.
Marcellino, M. (2015). English language teaching in Indonesia: A continuous challenge in education and cultural diversity. TEFLIN Journal, 19(1), p. 57-69.
Mercer, S., & Dörnyei, Z. (2020). Introduction. In Mercer, S. & Dörnyei, Z. (Eds) Engaging language learners in contemporary classrooms: Cambridge professional learning (p. 1-10). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI:10.1017/9781009024563.001
Nurhadi. (2002). Pendekatan kontekstual (Constextual approach). Jakarta: Depdiknas.
Philp, J. & Duchesne, S. (2016). Exploring engagement in tasks in the language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, p. 50-72.
Pridham, F. (2001). The language of conversation. London and New York: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.
Reschly, A. L. & Christenson, S. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly & Wylie, C. (Eds.) Handbook of research on student engagement (p. 3-20). Springer.
Sang, Y. & Hiver, P. (2021). Engagement and companion constructs in language learning. In Hiver, P., Al-Hoorie, A.H., & Mercer, S. (Eds.). Student engagement in the language classroom (p. 17-38). Clevedon.
Schlenker, B. A., Schlenker, P. A. & Schlenker, K. A. (2013). Antecedents of academic engagement and the implications for college grades. Learning and Individual Differences 27, p. 75–81. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.06.014.
Wong, J. and Waring, H. Z. (2010). Conversation analysis and second language pedagogy: A Guide for ESL/EFL Teachers. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.
Wullur, B. G. (2021). Multidimensional Task Engagement and Second Language Lexical Learning. Doctoral thesis, submitted to School of Graduate Study, Curtin University, Australia. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/86763