English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

INTRODUCTION Classroom situations mainly provide insights on the kinds of teaching that take place and how learning is shaped by it. These insights are particularly unique in ESL classroom situations, especially in the Malaysian context where different languages are mediated and negotiated in order to achieve an understanding of the target language. However, not many of us are well aware that classroom situations can also provide insights into the community of the classroom that has an important role in determining the evolving nature of the teaching and learning process. Classroom learning is seen as a co-operative effort between the teacher and learners (Van Lier, 1988; Allwright and Bailey, 1991; Tsui, 1995; Kumaradivelu, 1999). It is a symbiotic relationship that compliments each other in order to ensure the success of a particular lesson. Nevertheless, a report by University Malaya in 1993 suggested that the biggest challenge for ESL teachers was to get the learners to respond in their classroom. Some learners would take a longer time to respond and answer or would speak very softly. To date, these problems are still persistent among the ESL learners and are often associated with the shyness syndrome (Malcolm, 1987). Despite all these prevalent issues that are widely known and understood among ESL practitioners, this article intends to provide an alternative view of understanding learners participation, that is which from a sociocultural perspective. CLASSROOMS AS SOCIOCULTURAL COMMUNITIES The sociocultural theory proposes the idea that activities regardless, of whether they are in the workplace or in classrooms, do not always unfold smoothly (Lantolf, 2000). Based on this understanding, each situation is seen significant for providing an explanation to another situation. Therefore, it is important to locate the understanding of classroom situations on a framework that will shape our understanding of that particular context. A sociocultural perspective on language, culture and learning, for instance, perceives a classroom as sociocultural communities that give rise to issues concerning the languages and cultures of a classroom (Hall, 2002). Both teachers and learners, as the community of the classroom of this nature, create their understanding and expectation through daily norms and routines that they themselves engage in. Within this, they share certain types of understanding that will legitimate themselves as members of this classroom community. Both teacher
10

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

and learners will assume certain roles that help them to function and position themselves in this community of practice (Wenger, 1998). These understandings will help learners to develop themselves as language learners and users within that classroom context. On the other hand, the teacher gains insights of learners, as members of a particular group, and at the same time is made aware of individual learners with different abilities, as well as social and cultural backgrounds.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY This study employs an ethnographic approach in which a student teacher and her learners are observed during her English lessons on a daily basis for six weeks. Each lesson observed is referred as a classroom episode. The study primarily intends to investigate the discourse between the student teacher and her learners. The data are collected through the use of classroom observations, stimulated recall sessions and field notes. This paper discusses classroom discourse, part of larger findings that emerged from the area studied. Despite the fact that classroom discourse involves the interaction of both the teacher and her learners, this paper highlights the learners participation without excluding the contribution of the teacher.

INSIGHTS FROM THE CLASSROOM EPISODES, GROUP INTERVIEWS WITH LEARNERS AND STIMULATED RECALL SESSIONS This section discusses the findings that were gathered from the observations of the classroom episodes, interviews with the learners and stimulated recall sessions. It intends to present and discuss the findings from multiple perspectives that are derived from the researchers field notes, student teacher stimulated recall sessions and learners interviews.

STUDENT TEACHER AS THE LEADER FOR KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION The student teacher in this classroom context was always perceived as an authoritative figure in the classroom. She was seen as a person
11

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

who was responsible for all aspects of classroom management and decision making. This idea was embedded and regulated through the schooling system that the learners had gone through. In addition, the learners cultural backgrounds had also influenced the way the teacher was being perceived in the classroom. Since she was the oldest person in the classroom, there was a need to show respect to her, to listen to what she said and to speak only when one was requested to do so. Due to this situation, learners in this context seemed to play a less active role than in other contexts, particularly involving verbal participation, in the classroom. In fact, this classroom culture was not just a culture found among the Malaysians but found in many cultures especially those with East Asian backgrounds. Ngar and Littlewood (1997) have discussed several studies that see culture and previous education as factors that shaped the learners participation in the classroom. Their studies revealed that most learners have experienced inadequate speaking opportunities at their schools, where listening to teachers have been their most frequent classroom experience. These findings described a similar situation in some Malaysian classrooms. These findings may thus be solid reasons why these learners chose to play less active roles. From the sociocultural perspective, the learners participation, which could be seen in contrast to learners from western countries, clearly implicated the cultural roots that influenced learners attitudes and actions in the classroom. The learners in this study also seemed to expect to be directed and guided all the way in their learning. For instance, they would wait for the student teacher to divide them into groups rather than choosing their own group members. Instead of voluntarily taking the bids to her questions, the learners would give her the privileged right to select their turns. RESPONDING IN CHORUS In many exchanges of the classroom episodes, the learners chose to respond to the student teachers questions in chorus, especially when the questions were not allocated to a particular learner in the classroom. This was a common phenomenon that could be observed in the classroom. Most learners would appear to be comfortable when giving their answers in chorus but seemed reluctant when they were put in the spot light. Most of the time, the student teacher had to encourage the learners to answer individually by nominating them or asking them to put up their hands. Her awareness of their
12

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

reluctance was made explicit to them and quite often had given them the courage to individually respond to her questions (refer to transcript 1).
Transcript 1: CE10 (#lines 124-133#) T: What is Down Syndrome? LS: Genetic Disorder (Learners answer in chorus) T: Put up your hands (The learners keep quiet) T: When I ask you a question, I would like to hear the answer from you but then if you mumble from your place, maybe the rest cannot hear. Ok, I know you are very confident because the answer is there in the article. You need to put up your hands only. Who can answer the first question? (S and CY put up their hands)

THE LEARNERS RESPONSES TO THEIR PARTICIPATION The learners gave several reasons for little participation in class. Sometimes they didnt answer the questions because they really didnt know the answer to those questions. As one of the boys said in the group interview:
Sometimes I know and sometimes I dont know. (LISHSIAS)

CK, a Chinese boy, indicated that he would prefer to hear the answers from other learners first. If there was nobody answering, then he would answer the question. Most of the time, he would try to give an answer if the student teacher called his name. As illustrated in the following transcript:
I try to give the answer if she calls me. If theres nobody answering then Ill answer because I prefer to hear answers from other people first. (LICK)

In addition, D refused to answer because she was shy and afraid that other learners would laugh if she got the answer wrong. She explained in the group interview:
13

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

So shy to answer because afraid that the answer is wrong and other students will laugh. (LICYSLDML)

In contrast, H, who has good English proficiency, said that he didnt want his friends to refer to him as the person who always knows the answer. At the same time, he wanted to give his friends a chance to answer, and he would provide the answer if the rest of the classmates couldnt answer. His attitude can be explained in light of the maxims of modesty which is derived from the Confucion teaching (Wong, 1984; as cited in Ngar and Littlewood, 1997). Confucian teaching is taught to instill the impropriety of shining in front of ones peers. As said by H, knowing all the answers equals to showing off. Ngar and Littlewood (ibid) contend that this could be one of the reasons why some learners who always know the answer and are confident in their use of English would remain silent through a sense of modesty. His reason is illustrated as follows:
I know the answer but I dont want my friends to see that I always know the answer. I am not shy. I dont want to show off. I want to give my friends the chance to answer. If they cant answer, then only I answer. (LIH)

S indicated that she was willing to take the risk to answer certain questions; unlike other friends she wasnt bothered if her answer was right or wrong. She explained:
I just answer the question. I brave to answer the question. I not like other people, they become worried whether their answer is correct or not. I not like that. Actually they are good in English but they dont want to answer because they are scared. They scared they are wrong (LIS)

NS and SH werent very confident with their answers and that was the reason why they refused to put up their hands even if they knew the answer. They stated:
I am not confident with the answers. (LINSFRSYR) I am not sure of the answer. (LISHSIAS)

Classroom environment is a context-sensitive situation not only from the teachers but also from the learners point of views. The learners responses concerning their participation implied that it wasnt always the case that they didnt know the answers to the
14

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

questions posed by the student teacher. Their attitudes could be related to their affective domain, attitudes that needed to be explored and understood by the student teacher. Not only did the learners feel insecure and less confident speaking in another language but some learners, in the case of H, CK and S, were more sensitive to other learners emotional needs. Even though H and CK had better proficiencies in English, they didnt want to dominate the lessons. Instead, they provided opportunities for other classroom members to participate. These learners were aware of the multiple entities of the classroom and its community. They were aware of the differences in abilities, the strengths and weaknesses, the likes and dislikes of their peers. With this understanding, they tried to negotiate their positions in order to ensure that they did not overshadow or overpower their friends who had less language ability. Therefore, they had other motives or self-regulations that shaped how they wanted to behave and contribute in the classroom. This explained why there were inconsistencies in their participation and how they reacted to the student teacher in the classroom.

LEARNERS NEGOTIATION Despite the learners less active role in the classroom, occasionally they would contradict the student teachers ideas, as shown in transcript 3, where S opposed the idea of wanting a hand phone for her birthday. The student teacher was trying to weave the topic of hand phone into the discussion by asking whether they would want a hand phone for their birthday. She indicated that she was expecting yes as an answer so that she could move on to the next activity that she had prepared, but Ss disagreement had forced her to have an extended discussion relating to Ss answer. In view of this situation, other studies, such as Candela (1999), have shown that learners participation in classroom is active and does not always follow the teachers attempts to control discourse content. Therefore, this context, in which the teaching and learning occurred, was often modified and negotiated between the teacher and her learners. In this situation, the student teacher had to break her control and probe further into Ss disagreement. Thus, meaning is further negotiated through the student teachers questions and clarification request. Subsequently, this meaning was further constructed from Ss point of view and shared with the student teacher and the rest of her classmates.
15

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

Transcript 3: CE4 (#lines163-181#) T: S: T: S: T: S: T: LS: T: S: Ok, class, your birthdays are coming soon Ok, what do you think you wish to get for your coming birthday? Would you like to have a hand phone? No No? (surprised) I already have a hand phone. You already have a hand phone. Ha, S has a hand phone (talking to the rest). Wheres your hand phone? At home. Can you bring your hand phone to school? No (answer in chorus) Why? The teacher will scold.

GESTURES OR VERBAL INDICATORS The learners often negotiated their intentions by providing the student teacher with non-verbal cues. The student teacher indicated that it was through their eye contact and facial expressions that this understanding was achieved. She would rely on cues before allocating the learners the turn to respond to her questions (refer to transcript 4). In contrast, the learners who were not willing to participate would avoid having an eye contact with her. This seemed to be part of the negotiation that has been understood and established by both the student teacher and her learners. These cues could be in the form of gestures or the learners uttering part of their answers. Some learners would vocalise part of their answer in order to get her attention. As an example, FR would voice the answer loudly so that she could attract the student teachers attention and subsequently, she would be asked to answer the question. As she explained:
Maybe if I said the answer a bit loud, she would call my name. (LINSFRSYR)

Studies have shown that teachers call on learners who have vocalized their answers as indications that they knew the answer (Anton, 1999). In addition, Bruner (2003) perceived this as a form of
16

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

negotiation of meanings that involve the intersubjectivity of human beings to understand the mind of others through language, gestures or other means. This ability is enhanced through ones understanding of the role of context in which it occurs. In addition, gestures in this classroom context were used as a way of communicating intent. McCafferty (2004) in his study of gesture and second language learning reveals that the importance of gestures also has credence from a Vygotskian perspective. Similar to this finding gestures have become a form of interpersonal mediation where meaning is negotiated.
Transcript 2: CE3 (#lines 48-58#) T: S: T: T: H: T: H: T: Do you know why we want to protect turtles? Because (softly) [Yes, louder] (S just smile) .What will happen to the turtle? (T is looking at S) Extinct (quite soft but enough to get Ts attention) Ahh, yes, I beg your pardon. Extinct ( a bit louder this time) Extinct. Oh! Yes, very good. That is why we need to protect turtles. Our topic today is

GROUP ACTIVITIES The group discussion activities also revealed that there was a broader range of speech exchange and less emphasis on the IRF pattern that seemed to be dominating the teacher-fronted activities. This can be explained in two ways. Firstly, in group activities, the learners were given a longer time to formulate their ideas and put their words into English. Secondly, in a small group learners can provide assistance among themselves. From a sociocultural perspective, a study by Mitchell and Myles (2004) found that through the use of ZPD, new language knowledge is jointly constructed through the process of scaffolding and is further being appropriated by learners, who are seen as active agents in their own development. SYR, one of the learners, indicated that the group discussion motivated her to do the activities because she knew that she could always ask her friends to help her. This finding suggests that the assistance that the learners received in the group discussion had helped them to overcome the difficulties of having to do the task on their own.
17

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

Group activities often enhanced the negotiation of meaning made between learners due to the fact that group members were fully responsible for managing the discussion in their group. These group activities often revealed the use of learners first language or to some extend the use of code switching when communicating among the group members (refer to description 1). These strategies were consistent throughout all the classroom observations involving group discussion. The use of first language or code switching from English to other languages, not necessarily Malay, and vice versa indicated that the learners needed both languages in the construction of the target language. One of the possible reasons for such incidents would be familiar to Anton and Di Camilla (1999), who have postulated in their study that it is common for learners to use L1 for thinking aloud (as cited in Liebcher and Dailey OCain, 2005).
Description 1: Field Notes in CE3

This group consists of two Chinese girls, two Chinese boys and a Malay girl. CY, a Chinese girl, is writing down the answer on a mahjong paper. She is talking with the other Chinese boy, CK, in Chinese. Then she reads a few sentences from the article in English. The other Chinese girl is also talking to her in Chinese. Then she turns to the Malay girl and points to her the answer in the article. They continue the discussion in Chinese. Then she turns to the Malay girl and talks to her in Malay and goes on to talk in Chinese with the rest.

Quite often the student teacher seemed to ask for other learners opinions during the group presentations in her attempt to initiate peer-repairs among the learner (refer to transcript 4). However, the learners would just keep quiet and appear not to be making any attempt to answer to her request. This was quite a common phenomenon as these learners were not used to give comments on their peers presentation. In relation to this, Flowerdew and Miller (1995) have experienced a similar situation in Hong Kong in which they found that this negative attitude toward participation may have something to do with the local and academic cultures that learners operate in. This could also be due to the teacher-centered primary and secondary education that the learners have had (as cited in Ngar and Littlewood, 1997). I agree with this argument that learners who are not exposed to this active kind of learning
18

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

experience might have difficulties in expressing their views especially in commenting on their own peers presentation.
Transcript 4: CE7 (#lines21-36#) YFL: Any comments from you? (The learners keep quiet) YFL: Ok, I would like to add here (referring to the transparency) that the words this afraid here, actually you should use words like Students should not show their fear. You dont say afraid. Afraid is err this is correct, show distress. They didnt construct complete sentences but when S was presenting, she mentioned in full sentences. Thats what I wanted but then in written also you have to write complete sentences. All right? Ok, we go to the next group.

The learners confirmed that they had no problems working with friends from different cultural backgrounds because most of them had known each other since primary school. They also had no problems working with friends of the opposite sex. To some of them, they had close relationships and friendships outside of school because they were neighbours. This situation implied that familiarity with each others social and cultural context helped to reduce the complexities and competing discourses that existed in this classroom. As they indicated:
SH: No problem because we have known each other since Form One. (LISHSIAS) AD: I am so used of having them around. (LISIAZADM)

They admitted that the cultural backgrounds of the group members would determine the language for discussion. If the group members were multicultural then most likely the language for discussion would be in Bahasa Melayu despite the fact that some of the learners had Chinese or Tamil as their first language. Bahasa Melayu seemed to become the lingua franca for all the learners from different linguistic backgrounds. Bahasa Melayu, the national language for Malaysia, served as the language of unity for the learners from different cultural backgrounds to bridge their inadequacies of communicating
19

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

in the target language. When the medium of instruction throughout the education system was changed from English to Malay in the late 1970s, it was the Malaysian governments aspiration that the use of Malay language would unite the different cultures of the Malaysian people. In addition, the use of code mixing and code switching was apparent in the group discussion as compared to teacher fronted activities because this was the time that the learners communicated with one and another. The learners explained:
AS: I dont know how to say it in English. (LISHSIAS) AD: We discuss in Malay but the answers all we find in English. Because we are not good in English so it is difficult to discuss all in English. (LISIAZADM) S: Teacher says speak in English, we 1mixlah between Malay and English. Yes, just like 2rojak language, we mix it. I usually speak in Malay, I seldom speak in Tamil. (LIS) CK: Most of the time I speak in Chinese, if there is a Malay in my group, Ill consider her situation and speak in Malay. (LICK)

This also suggests that despite the multicultural backgrounds that existed in the classroom, the learners worked together to form a small culture (Holliday, 1999) of their own, which was the culture of the classroom. This small culture could also be seen functioning as a mini society (Breen, 1985) that shared certain definitions and ways of understanding each other that would enable them to work together. Through the process of interacting and interpreting, they provided each other with a form of reference that could only be understood and shared by this community of practice (Wenger, 1998). This small culture that existed in the classroom, overruled the generalisations of the large cultures that was represented
_____________________ Particle lah after the verb mix is a common feature of non-standard variety of Malaysian English. This is Commonly used among the Chinese. However, the use of this particle has become increasingly common among the Indians and Malays. In this case, S, who is an Indian has adopted this expression as well. 2 Rojak language is an expression to donate the code mixing between Malay English language. Rojak is actually a type of fruit salad in Malaysia where various types of fruit are mixed together with soya sauce, chillies and prawn paste.
1

20

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

outside the classroom. The reason was that once it was brought into the classroom by its community it was mediated and negotiated to form a culture of its own. The use of other languages besides English had been a great concern to the student teacher as she believed that she should reprimand the students from using languages other than English in her classroom. Despite the fact that the use of English can only be justified based on pedagogical grounds, Auerbach (1993) argues that this practice can be seen as being rooted in a particular pedagogical perspective. This belief helps to explain why some ex-British colonies, such as Malaysia and Hong Kong, are still holding on to this ideology. She suggests that there is a need to rethink and expand the range of options and uses for native languages in initial literacy and ESL instruction. In addition, classrooms can be seen as language ecologies where the learners have their language rights and are able to explore the possibilities of having a multilingual classroom. In a similar vein, Cook (2001) suggests that bringing L1 from exile into the ESL classroom may lead to innovations in methodology. This, according to her, may liberate a task-based learning approach that can help foster the learners natural collaborative efforts in the classroom through their L1 as well as their L2 use. The group discussion had also revealed the learners preferred ways of asking questions. Whenever the student teacher walked around the classroom to check on their discussion, the learners would take the opportunity to ask her questions which they would never do as an individual or when not in the group discussion. These questions ranged from asking the meaning of words to confirmation of the answers that they had discussed. However, the learners had never asked how to do certain tasks. The learners initiation, as in such cases, seemed to take place when there was a limited audience that could listen to their discussion. This action explained why the learners would never ask questions in the classroom but would ask questions outside the classroom when the lesson had ended. The student teacher indicated:
They asked me (0.3) different groups, yes. But the other group they didnt really ask me the meaning of the words, is just that they ahh they mentioned something like they themselves give me the meaning of the words and they want to confirm whether they are right or not.... (SRS5)

Learners felt that asking questions in the classroom and in front of their classmates was a problematic area that they could not come
21

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

to terms with. Not only did this type of situation put them in the spot light, they were also afraid to face the consequences of asking those questions. AZ felt that if he was to ask questions, there were too many questions that he would ask as there were so many things that he didnt know. D felt more comfortable asking questions in the staff room where there were fewer people. ML was afraid that the questions would make her friends laugh at her and SYR would feel more at ease asking S who she regarded as having better English proficiency than her. They explained:
AZ to D ML SYR : : : : I am afraid to ask and furthermore theres a lot of things ask. (LIAZADM) I asked the teacher but in the staff room. If theres anything wrong with the questions, other students will laugh at me. (LICYSLDML) I feel comfortable asking S and I always ask her. She is good in English. (LINSFRSYR)

The above examples signify that the learners were reluctant to adopt active speech roles in the classroom due to their own anxiety and self-perceived weaknesses in the language. The concept of uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede, 1986) shows that some people from certain cultures tend to avoid situations that they perceive as unclear or unpredictable. In connection to this idea, speaking up in class, especially raising questions and comments is a potentially risky business in many learners eyes (as cited in Ngar and Littlewood, 1997). Furthermore, besides asking questions, the kinds of initiations that were made to the student teacher further revealed that they were dependant on her as a determiner of the right and wrong answers. If the answers were approved by her, then they would move on to another question. On the contrary, if she raised doubt or did not agree with their answers, they would try to modify their answers to suit her preferences. Although one of the principles of group discussion was to get the learners to explore and share ideas among the group members, whenever they got the chance, they would refer to her and make sure that they got her approval. In a similar vein, the findings from Haworths (1999) study indicate that some groups of learners are not confident to express their own personal tastes and ideas, and therefore, they would prefer to work within their teachers scheme of work. In addition, she perceived this as a submissive acknowledgement of teacher discourse. This finding helps to explain the classroom culture of these learners in
22

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

relation to their group activities involvement. Successfully guessing the teachers expectations has been shown to be an important factor in the ability of these learners to implement the role of successful learners. In many instances, the learners showed that they were reluctant to come to the front to give their presentations without any persuasion from the student teacher. She explained that the learners were not used to presenting their ideas in front of the classroom as their own teacher had always assigned them to do written work. Like she said:
And also maybe when we have lessons, normally the teacher does not ask them to present their task. Normally, its just written work. (SRS11)

The student teacher also felt that the learners had lack of confidence and therefore would ask other learners with better proficiency to present on behalf of the group. As she explained:
Like they were very reluctant to come out and then I thought that they have not prepared anything, you see whereas the other groups they had their itinerary ready. I was surprised also when they showed me that they had the itinerary ... I know that we have S in that group definitely she will be the one presenting, right. So, the others they feel that they dont want to present because they dont want to go in front (SRS11)

However, H indicated that one of the reasons why he didnt like group presentation was because he was always being asked by his group members to present. In the case of H, his reservation towards group presentation was not due to his inability to speak English. It may well be due to his own dissatisfaction of the uneven distributions of roles among his group members and having to take the responsibility of performing well on behalf of his group members that only increased his own anxiety. He indicated:
Its a little problem. Because my friends will always ask me to present. May be they are afraid to ask other friends. (LIH)

23

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

CONCLUSION This ESL classroom was unique and quite complex. Johnson (1996) in her study on a student teachers teaching practice experience cautions student teachers not to perceive learners as faceless blobs. Instead, she encourages them to see learners as individuals with unique needs, interests, aptitudes, and personalities. Therefore, it was seen of importance for practicing and prospective teachers to study and investigate their learners personalities in order to provide them with some point of reference when conducting an activity in the classroom. In the case of this study, both the student teacher and learners engagement in this classroom were influenced by the sociocultural context that they inhabited as a community of the classroom and a community at large. This was due to the multicultural diversities that existed among the classroom community where members brought their own social identities and linguistic backgrounds into the classroom. In addition, these social identities also included elements such as their expectations, priorities, interests and dispositions. These were produced through their socialisation in home environments and their exposure to certain values and norms both of which help to explain the learners participation and attitudes in the classroom. Through these differences, their ideas and dispositions were negotiated to arrive at the mutual engagement of learning a foreign language. Therefore, it is necessary for teachers to understand that teaching and learning do not only occur within the four walls of the classroom itself. Teachers need to expand their understanding to a larger context outside of the classroom, for example, home environments and social backgrounds as suggested by many sociocultural researchers (Wenger, 1998; Lantolf, 2000; Hall, 2002). The study also raised other issues concerning learners participation that have no relation to their linguistic deficiencies. In other words, there were other factors that seemed to impinge on the ways that certain learners participated and positioned themselves in this classroom context. The ESL student teachers and practicing teachers need to be made aware that in some cases the learners refusal to participate in the classroom is not always related to their anxiety or lack of self-esteem in speaking English. Some of them have their own personal reasons that can be understood when the subject matter is probed and apprehended from their perspectives.

24

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 9-26 ISSN 1823 6820

This study has implications for both research and practice. In other words, teachers need to engage themselves in a small scale research study of their own classrooms so that they will have better perspectives of their teaching practice and so that they can increase their understanding of their learners. Learners need to be given voices so that factors that impinge their participation in the classroom can be further explored and understood from their perspectives. This study intends to shed light on the findings that emerged from a particular context that cannot be generalized to describe the whole population of ESL learners in Malaysia as different context will provide different kinds of information. However, there will be similarities and some differences that will enrich our understanding if we probe further into this particular area, the ESL learners participation, which has long been a concern for many ESL teachers over the years.

REFERENCES
Allwright, D. and Bailey, K. (1991). Focus on the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Anton, M. (1999). The Discourse of a Learner-Centered Classroom: Sociocultural Perspectives on Teacher-Learner Interaction in the Second Language Classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 83 (3), 303 318. Auerbach, E.R. (1993). Reexamining English Only in the ESL Classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 27(1), 9-32. Breen, M.P. (1985). The social context for language learning a neglected situation? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 135-158. Bruner, J. (2003). The Culture of Education. In M, Gergen & K, Gergen, (Eds), Social Construction: A Reader, ( pp 169-173). London: Sage. Candela, A. (1999). Students Power in Classroom Discourse. Linguistics and Education, 10(2), 139-163. Cook, V. (2001). Using the First Language in the Classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(3), 1-11. Flowerdew, J and Miller, L. (1995). On the Notion of Cultures in L2 Lecturers. TESOL Quarterly, 29(2), 345-373. Hall, J.K. (2002). Teaching and Researching Language and Culture. London: Pearson Education. Haworth, A. (1999). Bakhtin in the Classroom: What Constitutes a Dialogic Text? Some Lessons from Small Group Interaction. Language and Education, 13(2), 99-117. Holliday, A. (1999). Small Cultures. Applied Linguistics, 20(2), 237-264. 25