IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eltjnl/v16y2023i1p52.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Teacher-Student Interaction for English-Medium Instruction (EMI) Content and Language Learning and the Effects of Implementing Multimodal Input of Classroom Interaction: University Students’ Perceptions

Author

Listed:
  • Cheng-Ji Lai

Abstract

The discourse of interaction, Initiation-Response-Feedback (I-R-F) gained its popularity by fostering discussion between the teacher and learners but received critics for developing interactive communication in a controlled manner. With an attempt to provide pragmatic implications for EMI instructors, the study probed into perceptions of students (n=42) from different majors on how two pedagogical approaches (i.e., the I-R-F and the multimodal input of classroom interaction) differed in one EMI Cross-cultural Communication course in one middle-ranked university in Taiwan. The comparative, quasi-experiment research firstly investigated these students’ perceptions of teacher-student interaction for EMI content and language learning and secondly compared their perceptions on the implementation of the multimodal input of classroom interaction against the conventional baseline, the I-R-F. Both quantitative (i.e., survey) and qualitative (i.e., post-lesson student reflection journals and audio recordings) research methods were used. The survey results showed that these students were inclined to engage in extensive and substantial verbal output, expressed the importance of teacher-student interaction for learning the content of the course, and expected chances of lengthy verbal output and corrective feedback from the instructor. The results from students’ journals yielded that the instructor’s use of the multimodal input of classroom interaction significantly outperformed the use of the I-R-F in the categories of effectiveness, the level of student engagement, and the effectiveness of helping them learn the content. Ultimately, it was found that the use of the multimodal input of classroom interaction had triggered their higher-order of cognitive processing more (i.e., analyzing, evaluating, and creating).

Suggested Citation

  • Cheng-Ji Lai, 2023. "Teacher-Student Interaction for English-Medium Instruction (EMI) Content and Language Learning and the Effects of Implementing Multimodal Input of Classroom Interaction: University Students’ Percept," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 16(1), pages 1-52, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:16:y:2023:i:1:p:52
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/0/0/48200/51818
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/0/48200
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zohreh Eslami, 2010. "Teachers’ Voice vs. Students’ Voice: A Needs Analysis Approach of English for Acadmic Purposes (EAP) in Iran," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 3(1), pages 1-3, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Homa Babai Shishavan, 2010. "The relationship between Iranian English language Teachers’ and Learners’ Gender and their Perceptions of an Effective English Language Teacher," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 3(3), pages 1-3, September.
    2. Yan Song & Jing Zhou, 2022. "Revising English Language Course Curriculum Among Graduate Students: An EAP Needs Analysis Study," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(3), pages 21582440221, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:16:y:2023:i:1:p:52. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.