Tindak Tutur Direktif dan Strategi Kesantunan dalam Interaksi Kelas dan Dampaknya terhadap Partisipasi Mahasiswa
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63863/jce.v2i4.184Keywords:
Tindak Tutur Direktif, Kesantunan, Partisipasi Mahasiswa, Pragmatik Kelas, Inovasi PedagogisAbstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis bentuk, strategi, dan fungsi inovatif tindak tutur direktif dalam interaksi kelas serta dampaknya terhadap partisipasi mahasiswa. Latar belakang penelitian ini didasari oleh minimnya kajian yang menghubungkan variasi tindak tutur dengan kualitas partisipasi mahasiswa, khususnya dalam konteks pendidikan tinggi di Indonesia. Penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan analisis wacana pragmatik terhadap 12 jam rekaman perkuliahan (8 pertemuan) yang ditranskrip secara verbatim. Data dilengkapi dengan observasi dan wawancara semi-struktural. Hasil analisis menunjukkan terdapat 523 tindak tutur direktif dengan distribusi dominan imperatif langsung (21,4%) dan pertanyaan display (18,5%), sementara bentuk inovatif seperti pemberian opsi (7,8%) dan reflektif/metakognitif (4,8%) meski jarang digunakan, terbukti memicu partisipasi elaboratif mahasiswa hingga 70%. Strategi kesantunan yang paling sering digunakan adalah modalitas (25,6%) dan sapaan inklusif (18,5%) yang berperan dalam menciptakan iklim interaksi harmonis. Temuan ini menegaskan bahwa direktif inovatif bukan sekadar alat kontrol, melainkan pengungkit kolaborasi dan berpikir kritis. Penelitian ini berkontribusi secara teoretis pada pengembangan kajian pragmatik pendidikan serta secara praktis menawarkan strategi linguistik bagi dosen untuk meningkatkan keterlibatan mahasiswa di kelas.
Downloads
References
[1] G. N. Leech, The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001
[2] M. Susanti and S. A. Liusti, “Directing Learning Through Laguage : An Analysis Of Teachers’ Directive Speach Acts In Indonesian High School Classroms,” vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 359–370, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25134/ieflj.v11i2.11813
[3] J. Fredricks, P. Blumenfeld, and A. Paris, “School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence,” Review of Educational Research, vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 59–109, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
[4] M. Churiyah and D. A. Sakdiyyah, “International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding Indonesia Education Readiness Conducting Distance Learning in Covid-19 Pandemic Situation,” Int. J. Multicult. Multireligious Underst., vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 491–507, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18415/ijmmu.v7i6.1833
[5] K. Sormunen, “Maker-Centered Project-Based Learning in Inclusive Classes : Supporting Students _ Active Participation with Teacher-Directed Reflective Discussions,” pp. 691–712, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09998-9
[6] C. Maiklad and K. Numtong, “Politeness and Speech Acts in Cross-Cultural YouTube Interview Discourse : A Comparative Study of Thai and Chinese Hosts and Guests,” vol. 0672, no. December, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.70730/HXUN2464
[7] R. Driver and G. Erickson, “Theories-in-Action: Some theoretical and empirical issues in the study of students’ conceptual frameworks in science,” Stud. Sci. Educ., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 37–60, 1983, doi: 10.1080/03057268308559904. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057268308559904
[8] M. Analysis, L. Wijnia, G. Noordzij, and L. R. Arends, The Effects of Problem - Based , Project - Based , and Case - Based Learning on Students ’ Motivation :, vol. 36, no. 1. Springer US, 2024. doi: 10.1007/s10648-024-09864-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09864-3
[9] I. Mantra, N. Handayani, and A. Pramawati, “Alternative learning methods employed by language teachers in the new normal of covid-19,” Ijee (Indonesian J. English Educ., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 232–246, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v8i2.21135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v8i2.21135
[10] J. R. Searle, Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1979. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609213
[11] S. Zhanysbekova, S. Nurgali, S. Akbota, S. Gulzira, and A. Nurkassym, “Enhancing Pragmatic Competence in Language Lessons for School Children,” vol. 6798, pp. 7096–7107, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.62754/joe.v3i8.5306
[12] P. Brown and S. C. Levinson, Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085
[13] P. D. Suryandani and I. G. Budasi, “An Analysis Of Directive Speech Acts Produced By Teachers In EFL Classrom,” vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 36–45, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30813/jelc.v12i1.2823
[14] N. A. Shahaji and S. C. Colleges, “Classroom Discourse Analysis : A Case of ESL Reading Class,” vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 156–165, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36892/ijlls.v3i2.368
[15] A. Rifai, “FLIP : Foreign Language Instruction Probe Analising EFL T eacher ’ s Politeness Strategies i n Classroom Interaction,” 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54213/flip.v1i2.176
[16] A. M. Persky, M. S. Medina, and A. N. Castleberry, “Developing critical thinking skills in pharmacy students,” Am. J. Pharm. Educ., vol. 83, no. 2, pp. 161–170, 2019, doi: 10.5688/ajpe7033. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7033
[17] Z. Qiongyan and C. Simin, “On Positive Politeness Strategies of Teacher Talk in English Classroom Teaching for Non-English Major Undergraduates,” vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 1–10, 2021, doi: 10.25236/FER.2021.041001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25236/FER.2021.041001
