Evis Sumilia, Hilda Puspita, Elfrida Elfrida


Abstract: The aims of this research were to find out kinds of student response and the most dominant response used by the second grade students in Senior High School. The researcher was designed as a descriptive quantitative research. The population of the research was second grade student in Senior High School 8 Bengkulu. The samples were 60 students. The data were collected by using a set of questionnaire. There were 25 statements of students’ responses which consisted of five aspects by Moskowitzs in Brown (2001). They were student response (specific), student response (open-ended or student initiated), confusion, silence and nonverbal. The result of this study showed the students of Senior High School 8 Bengkulu preferred to use five aspects of the student response i.e., student response (specific), student response (open-ended or student initiated), confusion, silence and nonverbal. In addition, the most dominant response used by the student is student response (specific). The student more interested in using response specific in answering the teacher question.


Keywords:  Students’ Responses, Teachers’ Questions, Classroom Interaction

Full Text:



Andana, Yona. (2018). “The type of teacher’s questions in English teacher-learning process at MAN Mojokerto”. Faculty of Education and Teacher Training. Sunan Ampel State Islamic University. Surabaya.

Bennett, Jonathan. (1975). Stimulus, response, meaning. American Philosophical Quarterly monograph. New York. Vol 79. No.9.

Retrieved from

Bambaeeroo & Shokrpour. (2017). The impact of the teachers’ non-verbal communication on success in teaching. Journal of Advances in Medical. University of Medical Sciences. Iran

Brown, H. Douglas, S. (2001). Teaching by principle: an interactive approach to language pedagogy, 2nd edition. New York: Longman

Creswell, J.W. (2002). Educational research planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research, 4th edition. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Einstein. (2016). An analysis of teacher’s questioning strategies. Academic Journal, vol. 11. No. 22. Retrieved from

Ennis, Robert H. (1996). “Critical Thinking Disposition: Their Nature and Assesibility”. Informal Logic. Vol. 18, Nos.2 & 3.

Hardianti, Rosi. (2016). A study of EFL students’ oral communication strategies in discussions. Indonesian EFL Journal, Vol 2(1), 23-11. Retrieved from

Hudson, A. Richard. (2012). The meaning of question. Linguistic society of Amerika. Vol. 51. No. 1.

Lee, Youngju and Kinzie, Mable. (2011). Teacher question and student response with regard to cognition and language use. Instructional Science Journal. Retrieved from t:

Muhlisin, Ahmad. (2018). Analysis of students’ response of the implementation of RMS (reading, min mapping, and sharing) learning model in philosophy of science. Unnes Science Educational Iournal. Universitas Negeri Semarang

Paulina, James. (2002). Student learning activities. New Delhi: Sage Academic Press.

Richard, J.C & Lockhart, C. (1996). Reflecting teaching in second language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. P. 185

Wensi, Foristia Kencana. (2018). “Student’s strategies in responding to teacher’s oral question”. Faculty of Teacher Training and Education. Universitas Bengkulu. Bengkulu



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

JALL has been indexed and abstracted in: