1. A Comparative Study on Classroom Interaction using FIACS
Mohammed Hussain P A
MAE 14082
Azim Premji University

2. Classroom Interaction
Ned. A. Flanders – Teaching is an interactive process. Interaction means participation of teacher and students in the process of teaching.
Teacher influences students through lecture, questions, criticize, giving direction.
Students reaction to teachers questions, responses, their initiation.

3. Flanders Interaction Analysis Categories System (1955-60)
System of interaction to study what is happening in a classroom when teacher teaches.
Verbal interaction during classroom period
Classified verbal behavior into 10 categories
Teacher’s Talk – 7 categories
Pupil Talk – 2 categories
Neither teacher Talk nor pupil Talk – 1 category

4. Socio emotional Climate in classroom
NCF 2005 – Importance and need of classroom spaces as places where children can ask questions freely, engaging in dialogue with teacher and peers, during an ongoing lesson.
Participation of children – Experience, socializing
Participation within an authoritarian frame would give participation a very different form from participation within a democracy.

5. Aims of Study
Identify the difference in socio emotional climate in classroom by observing two different school settings.
Analyse teachers indirect and direct influence in classroom
Measure students and teachers participation in classroom and analyse the influence of factors of school culture

6. School Settings Poorna Learning Centre Bangalore.
2. Markaz English Medium School Kerala.

7. Methodology
One class from Primary, Secondary and High school Sections selected for study.
Observation using FIAC
Interview with teachers
Teaching as participatory observation

8. Observation
Poorna
Class room setting, circle times, self discipline, feedback,
Quality equity, equality, inclusion
Uniforms and other disciplines
Markaz
classroom setting and strength, minority school, TPD, structured and well planned Assesment
Right education, for right reason, competitive,
Code of ethics based in religion, Uniforms and disciplines

9. FIACS Obseravtions – a total of 3882 classroom behavior observed. link
III C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Total
111 V 13 X
X11 11 30
XX111
XXXV11 64
V11
XXXX
XXXXXV XV
159
1111 V1 20 X1
XXXXX
V1111
125 27 12 29
127
454

10. FIACS Analysis Catergory School Primary Section Upper Primary Section
High School Section
Teacher Talk Percentage
Poorna School
71.81
59.07
62.44
Markaz School
64.75
68.9
70.87
Pupil talk Percentage
24.06
39.2
27.3
29.29
29.03
26.7
Silence
4.12
1.66
10.25
5.90
2.04
2.40
Teacher Response Ratio
57.75
74.19
76.92
64.78
63.82 87
Pupil Initiation
Ratio
42.78
21.69
11.87
4.51
2.81
3.93

11. Positive vs Negetive Reinforcement
Continuation ….
Categories
School
Primary Section
Upper Primary Section
High School Section
Indirect Teacher Talk Ratio
Poorna School 24 22
23.12
Markaz School
24.2
24.33
25.07
Direct Teacher Talk Ratio
47.8
37.03
39.3
40.5
44.58
45.7
Indirect – Direct influence Ratio
0.5
0.595
0.58
0.59
0.54
Content Cross
72.8
63.71 69 73
79.4
69.5
Teacher Control 14
4.4
4.7
5.5 6
1.9
Positive vs Negetive Reinforcement
0.9
3.2
3.8 4
1.4

12. Discussion
School Culture difference – Authoritarian vs Authoritative or Democratic
Teacher – Student relationship in classrooms
Classroom management and control through power relations.
Students doubts and initiative vs response to teachers questions.

13. Discussion
Teacher talk is dominating in all classes, Average in alternative school and in Markaz school.
Pupil talk : 28.3
Neither teacher nor pupil Talk % is comparatively more in formal school.
Teacher response ratio was more in alternative school, except in high school session.
Pupil initiation ratio shows great difference in alternative school : 2.44
Indirect – direct influence varies from 0.54 to 0.6 and alternate school is little better

14. Discussions
Direct talk ratio was dominating in Markaz school than Poorna school.
Indirect talk ratio measured more in Markaz than Poorna.
Emphasis on content : Markaz school teachers shown more content focused teaching than Poorna.
Teacher control in Poorna was more than Markaz in data analysis
Positive and negative Reinforcement ratio was more in Poorna school compared to Markaz.

15. Limitations All behaviors cannot included.
System of analysis is content free and type of class.
Doubts by students cannot have a category.
Confusions regarding categorizing.
Time consuming for interpretation.
Peer talking or interaction between students cannot be noted.

16. Conclusion
Socio emotional environment in Alternative school is much favour of effective classroom interaction than the formal school
Students initiatives and doubt raising was more visible in alternative school where in other school it limited to responses to teachers questions.

17. THANK YOU