Flanders Interactional Analysis Technique/Method

By Dr. Atul Thakur

Dronacharya College of Education Rait, Kangra Himachal Pradesh

• Competency of teacher = degree of effectiveness of teaching (observed by classroom interaction)

• Definition: Interactional analysis is a technique consisting of

objective and systematic observation of the classroom events for the study of the teacher’s behaviour and the process of interaction going inside the classroom.

Systems of Interactional Analysis

• By Richard L. Ober (1971) (i) Sign (ii) Category

(i) Sign • Checklist• Irrespective of frequency• Only once observed

(ii) Category• Behaviour is classified in categories• Observation at regular interval• (eg. Flander’s Intereaction Analysis )

Flanders Interaction Analysis Technique

• Developed by Ned A. Flanders (1959) at university of Minnesota

• Classroom behaviour is divided into three majot sections1. Teacher talk (4+3=7 sub Categories)

2. Student Talk (2 sub Categories)

3. Silence or confusion

total = 10 sub Categories

Teacher talk

• Teacher talk (apiq) Indirect Teacher talk/Influence

• Accepts feelings• Praises or encourages• Accepts or uses student’s idea• Asks questions

Direct Teacher talk/Influence (ldc)• Lecturing• Giving directions• Criticising or justifying authority

Student Talk

• Student Talk Response

• Student Talk Initiation

• Silence or Confusion

Using Flanders interaction analysis• Steps

1. Observing or recording classroom events

2. Construction of interaction matrix

3. Interpretation on interaction matrix

1. Observing or recording classroom events Appropriate position No interference or disturbance Proper recording (memorization of codes) Noting at every 3 seconds Column or row Note if any

Rules

1. When not certain to which two or more categories a statement belong, chose the category that is numerically farthest from category 5.

2. If the primary tone of the teacher’s behaviour has been consistently direct or indirect, do not shift to the appropriate classification unless a clear indication of the shift is given.

3. Observer must not be concerned by his own bias.

4. If more than one category occurs in 3 second interval, note all.

Construction of interaction matrix

10 3 10 6 2 6 1

8 2 4 3 10 6 2

6 1 8 3 10 6 2

6 1 8 2 4 3 10

6 2 6 1 10 6 2

1 1 8 2 10

Interaction Matrix TableCategory 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 total

1 l 1

2 l l 2

3 l 1

4 l 1

5 l 1

6 l l 2

7 0

8 l 1

9 0

10 l l 2

Total 1 2 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 2 11

Interpretation

1. Quantitative1. Interaction categories

2. Areas of Interaction

3. Behaviour ratios

4. Interaction Variables

2. Qualitative1. Clockwise flow diagram

2. Box-flow diagrams

3. Interaction models of critical teaching behaviours

1. Behaviour ratios1. Teacher Talk Ratio (TT)

TT = (1+2+3+4+5+6+7)/NX100

2. Indirect Teacher Talk (ITT)ITT = (1+2+3+4) /NX100

3. Direct Teacher Talk (DTT)DTT = (5+6+7) /NX100

4. Pupil Talk (PT)PT = (8+9) /NX100

5. Silence or Confusion (SC)SC = (10) /NX100

6. Indirect to Direct Ratio (I/D) I/D = (1+2+3+4)/(5+6+7)X100

Behaviour Ratio Norms

Sr. No Behaviour Ratio

Symbol By Flanders

Indian

1 Teacher Talk TT 70 67

2 Pupil talk PT 19 21

3 Silence/ Confusion

SC 11 12

4 Direct teacher Talk

DTT 35 26

5 Pupil Talk PT 20 19

6 Indirect/Direct I/D 52 46

Advantages

1. Reliable and objective for verbal behaviour

2. Determines pattern and flow of teaching behaviour

3. Analytical

4. Desirable behaviour of trainee teachers

5. Modifies behaviour by feedback

6. Supplements microteaching and teamteaching

Limitation

1. Verbal behaviour only

2. No quality of content judgment

3. Mainly on teacher behaviour

4. No place for Pupil-pupil interaction

5. Laborious

6. Shortage of expert