In talk can be improved (Wang, 2015). To

             In L2 classrooms, teacher talk is one of the
significant sources of input. Teachers transfer information to their students,
they give feedback when they talk etc. (Wang, 2015). However, if students do
not pay attention, they do not notice what their teacher talk about. Therefore,
teachers should attract their attention by choosing topics that are familiar to
them, using familiar and simple words, using their body language to be able to
more attracting and more understandable (Wang, 2015). Attracting students’
attention and enable them to understand their teacher are vital in language
learning classrooms (Wang, 2015).

            There are two main aspects for teachers
when they provide language information. These are paralinguistic cues and extra
linguistic cues (Wang, 2015). When teacher use paralinguistic cues such as
pauses, stresses, and a drawling voice, learners pay more attention to find an
alternative answer and help teacher say what she/he wants to say. This is an
indirect way to get students’ attention (Wang, 2015). When teachers use extra
linguistic cues such as hand gestures and facial expressions, learners can
understand easier. When students see the body language, they can notice easily
what teacher wants to say. This is a direct way. With these aspects, the
effectiveness of teacher talk can be improved (Wang, 2015).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

            To improve effectiveness of teacher talk,
communicative competence is significant and it has different views: language as
context, language as interaction, and language as negotiation (Widiati and
Cahyono, 2006). Learners of a language need to have knowledge of more than its
grammatical and semantic rules. They need to know native speakers’ talk in
interaction. In other words, they need to know how they speak appropriately for
effective speaking (Widiati and Cahyono, 2006).

            There are four components of communicative
competence: grammatical competence, discourse competence, sociolinguistic
competence and strategic competence (Widiati and Cahyono, 2006). These components affect speaking proficiency (Widiati and Cahyono, 2006).

competence is linguistic competence. It’s related to knowledge of language
itself. Grammatical competence enables to understand and use language
structures appropriately. This improves the fluency (Widiati and Cahyono, 2006).

competence is the understanding of the social context, rules norms etc.
Understanding the sociolinguistic enables speakers to know what comments are
appropriate, how to ask questions during interaction and how to respond by
using body language according to the purpose of the speaking (Widiati and Cahyono, 2006).

also need to improve discourse competence. It enables students to form
sentences in a meaningful way. They can control turn taking in communication
when they have a large scale of structures and discourse marker to express
their opinions (Widiati and
Cahyono, 2006).

            The fourth component is strategic
competence. It is the ability to manage strategies and rules of the other
components. Strategic competence is ability to maintain a conversation. When
students encounter an obstacle in a conversation, they use compensation
strategies and they express themselves in a different way (Widiati and Cahyono,
2006). When they do not understand speaker, they can ask clarification and
repetition. Therefore, they can maintain the conversation. Teachers should know
communicative competence very well and speak appropriately. They also should
teach the communicative competence to students (Widiati and Cahyono, 2006).   

addition these, Lei (2009) states that effective and good teacher talk should facilitate
learning and support communicative interaction in the classroom. There are some
features of communicative teacher talk: Teacher should ask referential
questions (Lei, 2009). Teacher does not know answers of these questions and
he/she ask them to get their answers. Referential questions support
communicative interaction. Thus these questions are genuine questions (Lei,
2009). Teacher should give content feedback and he/she should avoid IRF
sequences (Lei, 2009). In these sequences, teacher asks question that he/she
know answer of it. Then, he/she comments the answer as a feedback. This is easy
for students. However, more complex and flexible conversations wait for them
outside the classrooms. These types of sequences are not natural communication
(Lei, 2009).

            For natural, comfortable, and effective
teacher talk, teachers can use personalisation (Kim, 2016). For example, they
can tell their personal stories and they can use students’ names in sentences,
so students pay attention and internalise information. This provides students
to learn easier and more effectively (Kim, 2016).

            In my
first micro-teaching, my teacher talk was not appropriate for my students’
proficiency level. I learnt that I should simplify my language, use some clues,
use my body language to be more understandable, choose familiar words to them,
attract their attention to enable them to notice what I am talk about. I should
know the communicative competence very well and I should speak appropriately.
Teacher is a model for learners. If teacher speak understandable and
appropriate for communicative competence, speaking can become easier for
students. Therefore, I should speak appropriate for communicative competence
and also appropriate for my students’ proficiency level. Moreover, I should
enable them to speak appropriate for communicative competence. I should give
them activities, in which they can negotiate meaning; take turns; try to start,
maintain and end conversations. Before that, I should give adequate input to
make them ready to speak. I should enable them to learn topic, vocabularies,
structures and functions they will need. After that I should motivate them to
speak and give feedback at the end of their speaking.