International Teacher Education Conference 2014 1

International Teacher Education Conference 2014
Value df p post-hoc
chi-square 361.17 4 .000 NEATs > baseline > Korean in team
The chi-square test shows that the value 361.17 is statistically significant on the probability of confidence
99.9%. Also, the post-hoc result indicates that three teachers belong to different groups, which means that
Korean teachers in team teaching significantly differ in their utterances of instructional languages from the
baseline Korean teachers who teach English alone in the class.
Analyses of sentence types and questions in teacher utterances
1) Analysis of sentence types
Investigating English sentence types of teacher’s utterances is of consequence to teacher’s roles played in the
English classes. Three sentence types under investigation are declarative, imperative and interrogatives. When
teachers explain instructional contents, they tend to use declaratives; but when they engage in managing classes,
their language often turns into imperatives. Also, when teachers seek for interactions with students, they tend to
use interrogatives. With this observation in mind, the teacher utterance analysis of sentence types presumably
leads to insights on the roles that teachers play in the English classes. Table 4 shows that Korean teachers of
English in team teaching with NEATs are contrasted in their frequencies of sentential types of teacher utterances
(declaratives, imperatives and interrogatives) with their counterparts, the solo Korean teachers of English.
Table 4. Sentence Types of Teacher Utterances
Teachers Declaratives Imperatives Interrogatives Total
Korean
NEAT
Baseline
freq 708 464 242 1414
% 50.1% 32.8% 17.1% 100%
freq 822 182 297 1301
% 63.2% 14.0% 22.8% 100%
freq 1378 721 857 2956
% 46.6% 24.4% 29.0% 100%
The utterances in team teaching consist of 708 times of declaratives (50.1%), 464 times of imperatives
(32.8%) and 242 times of interrogatives (17.2%) for Korean teachers; 822 times of declaratives (63.2%), 182
times of imperatives (14.0%) and 297 times of interrogatives (22.8%). The total frequencies of both Korean
teachers and NEATS in team teaching are 1,530 times of declaratives (56.4%), 646 times of imperatives (23.8%)
and 539 times of interrogatives (19.8%). On the other hand, the utterances of the baseline teachers in their solo
teaching is comprised of 1378 times of declaratives (46.6%), 721 times of imperatives (24.4%) and 857 times of
interrogatives (29.0%).
Analysis result on different sentence types of Korean teacher's utterances in team teaching bears the
following characteristics when compared with the frequencies of sentential types in baseline solo teaching:
Declaratives in team teaching occupy substantially a bigger percentage (9.8%) of teacher talks compared with
the baseline solo teaching, but NEATs speak more declaratives than Korean teachers in team teaching by a
margin of 13.1%. The imperative forms of Korean teacher utterances in team teaching outweigh in proportion
the imperatives uttered by the NEATs by a margin of 18%, and the imperative forms exceed the baseline solo
teachers by a margin of 8.2%. Interrogatives in team teaching are of smaller percentage of 22.8% compared to
the 29.0% of the baseline solo teaching. Korean teacher’s interrogatives (17.2%) are even smaller than the
29.0% of the baseline solo Korean teachers.
The higher proportion of declaratives and the lower proportion of interrogatives of team teaching compared
to the baseline solo teaching explain that the verbal interaction with students in team teaching is less active due
to the lack of questions and answers compared to the baseline solo teaching. Korean teachers in team teaching is
even less active than NEATs in giving language-related instructions in declarative languages and addressing
questions in interrogatives to students when compared to the native speakers. This means that NEATs play the
main teaching roles and Korean teachers of English in team teaching are less involved in language-related
instruction. However, they are using substantially more imperatives than NEATs and the baseline solo teachers.
90