A Comparative Study Of NEST And NNEST Classroom Interaction In Chinese Context

This study examined the classroom interaction between students and two groups of interlocutors: NESTs (native English speaking teachers) and NNESTs (non-native English speaking teachers) within input and interaction theoretical framework. The objective is to reveal: (1) the discrepancy of classroom time distribution between NESTs and NNESTs within the frame of classroom verbal exchanges;and (2) the differences and correlations of interactional adjustments in the pattern of "teacher question → student response → teacher feedback → student uptake". Four NESTs and four NNESTs were observed;12 periods of two different kinds of classes (listening and speaking, reading and writing) approximately 600 minutes were recorded and transcribed with Communicative Orientation of Language Teaching (COLT). 49 NNESTs and 37 NESTs responded to two questionnaires targeting at teachers' question technique and classroom activity. A quantitative approach was used to analyze data from classroom observation and questionnaires. The results analysis from workshop on Foreign Teachers' Teaching and Research furthered the study on NESTs' perception of language teaching and learning in China.The findings of this study indicated that NESTs and NNESTs were different in their teaching time distribution in terms of classroom management and instruction. More input was found in NNESTs' class as the total number of teacher question and feedback moves was more in NNESTs' class than that in NESTs' class. However, the rate of students' response was higher in NNESTs' class than that in NESTs' class, less students' uptake was found in NNEST's class. There appeared more content questions in NNEST's class than in NEST's class. In comparison NESTs tended to use more mechanical question. Repetition and acknowledgement were the most frequently used feedbacks in NNESTs' class while evaluation feedbacks were often adopted by NESTs' class. More clarification feedbacks were discovered in NNESTs' group. NESTs and NNESTs did not demonstrate any statistical differences in terms ofcorrection feedback and summary feedback. Teacher type was related with two question types (content question and mechanical question) and six feedback types (repetition, translation, recast, clarification, acknowledgement and evaluation). These six types of feedbacks were correlated with content question.More supportive and collaborative classroom atmosphere was detected in NESTs' class. Working with small groups of students and providing a variety of classroom activities were some characteristics of their interaction techniques. Concerning questioning strategy, NNESTs often asked individual student whereas NESTs preferred to ask questions in a random order. Results revealed that NNESTs' teaching approach seemed to agree with Chinese students' cognitive style.More positive view points toward language teaching as a profession were gained in NESTs group. Memorization, lack of critical thinking, test-oriented and overanxiousness for quick result were NESTs' general impression of Chinese students' language learning. Workshop analysis showed that NESTs' perception of their role as language teachers agree not very well with Chinese student's expectation of teachers. Implications from the aspect of theory, methodology and practice were provided.