This study examines teacher–student verbal interactions in Taiwan’s Teaching English through English (TETE) vocational high school classrooms under the national Bilingual 2030 initiative. We aimed to characterize teacher questioning and initiation–response–feedback (IRF) interaction patterns, focusing on question types, cognitive demands, and student responses. Fourteen TETE lessons (totaling 684 minutes) taught by vocational teachers in a national bilingual education competition were video-recorded. We manually transcribed the recordings and coded all teacher questions (n = 430) using Sánchez-García’s taxonomy and Anderson & Krathwohl’s revised Bloom’s taxonomy. IRF sequences were identified, and student responses were coded by language (Chinese vs. English). Descriptive and inferential statistics (correlations, ANOVA via SPSS) were applied. Inter-rater agreement on coding was 90%–92%. Quantitative results revealed that teachers’ questions were mostly procedural (28.4%), display (26.0%), or off-task (13.0%). Referential (content-focused) questions were significantly more common among higher-performing teachers. By cognitive level, 62% of questions targeted recall (Bloom’s lowest level), 28% application, and 10% analysis. Question lexical complexity aligned with basic-user proficiency (CEFR A1–A2). In 197 IRF sequences, students responded more often in Chinese (202 instances) than English (176 instances). Teachers’ question frequency was positively correlated with teaching performance (R = .585, p = .028). ANOVA indicated significant grade-level differences in questioning frequency (F(2, 11) = 4.619, p = .035), with ninth-grade teachers asking significantly fewer questions. These findings indicate that current TETE classroom discourse is dominated by lower-order, procedural questions and frequent first language (L1) use, posing challenges for English-immersion goals. We discuss implications for Taiwan’s bilingual education policy and practice, including the need for targeted teacher development to promote higher-order questioning and balanced L1/L2 interaction to better support bilingual instruction. These results highlight the need for classroom practices and policies aligned with Taiwan’s bilingual goals.
Al HaririK. (2015). Using L1 in teaching English to advanced students. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 4, 220–223.
2.
AlmoayidiK.A. (2018). The effectiveness of using L1 in second language classrooms: A controversial issue. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 8, 375–379.
3.
AnJ.MacaroE.ChildsA. (2021). Classroom interaction in EMI high schools: Do teachers who are native speakers of English make a difference?System, 98, Article 102482.
4.
AnJ.ThomasN. (2021). Students’ beliefs about the role of interaction for science learning and language learning in EMI science classes: Evidence from high schools in China. Linguistics and Education, 65, Article 100972.
5.
AndersonL.W.KrathwohlD.R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
6.
AnJ.ChildsA. (2023). Teacher questions, wait time, and student output in classroom interaction in EMI science classes: An interdisciplinary view. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 13, 471–493.
7.
BloomB. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook I cognitive domain. David McKay.
8.
CianfloneE. (2009). L1 use in English courses at university level. ESP World, 8, 1–6.
9.
CharismaD.DefalniS. (2019). The implementation of FIACS in English classroom. Concept: Community Concern for English Pedagogy and Teaching, 5, 86–93.
10.
CumminsJ. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire (Vol. 23). Multilingual Matters.
11.
DoizA.LasagabasterD. (2021). An analysis of the use of cognitive discourse functions in English-medium history teaching at university. English for Specific Purposes, 62, 58–69.
12.
EchevarríaJ.VogtM.ShortD.J. (2017). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model (5th ed.). Pearson.
13.
ErdoganI.CampbellT. (2008). Teacher questioning and interaction patterns in classrooms facilitated with differing levels of constructivist teaching practices. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1891–1914.
14.
GarcíaO.LiW. (2015). Translanguaging, bilingualism, and bilingual education. The handbook of bilingual and multilingual education. Palgrave Macmillan.
15.
GaleganeG. (2021). Interactional patterns in English as a second language classrooms at higher learning. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 4, 1–10.
16.
GallagherF.ColohanG. (2017). T(w)o and fro: Using the L1 as a language teaching tool in the CLIL classroom. The Language Learning Journal, 45, 485–498.
17.
GencE.YukselD. (2021). Teacher questions in English medium instruction classrooms in a Turkish higher education setting. Linguistics and Education, 66, Article 100992.
18.
GhafarZ.N.SawalmehM.H.M. (2023). The influence of effective teaching on elementary school students: A review paper. Journal of Learning and Development Studies, 3, 10–14.
19.
HalasaN.H.Al-ManaseerM. (2012). The use of the first language in second language learning reconsidered. College Student Journal, 46, 71–81.
20.
HsuL.L. (2006). The relationship among teachers’ verbal and nonverbal immediacy behaviours and students’ willingness to speak in English in central Taiwanese college classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oral Roberts University.
21.
JulanaN.A. (2018). The patterns of classroom interaction in English speaking course. Doctoral dissertation, UIN Ar-Raniry Banda Aceh.
22.
KarafilB.İlbayÖ.U. (2024). EFL instructors’ satisfaction with teaching English online at tertiary level. Participatory Educational Research, 11, 76–96.
23.
KimS.Y. (2008). Five years of teaching English through English: Responses from teachers and prospects for learners. English Teaching, 63, 51–70.
24.
KopinskaM.Fernández-CostalesA. (2023). Motivation, anxiety and classroom interaction in EMI. Journal of Multilingual Theories and Practices, 4, 53–75.
25.
KrashenS. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon.
26.
LasagabasterD.DoizA. (2023). Classroom interaction in English-medium instruction: Are there differences between disciplines?Language, Culture and Curriculum, 36, 310–326.
27.
LasagabasterD.DoizA. (2022). An examination of the degree of complexity of teacher questions in English-medium university courses. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 15, Article e1526.
28.
LittlewoodW.T. (2008). Thirty years later: Henry Widdowson’s teaching language as communication. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18, 212–217.
LiuY.YeungP.S. (2023). The effects of using L1 Chinese or L2 English in planning on speaking performance among high-and low-proficient EFL learners. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 8, Article 35.
31.
LiuT.Y. (2008). Are they doing better after getting admitted into technology university? A study to explore changes of students’ English proficiency. Journal of National Taitung University, 1, 223–253.
32.
LoY.Y.FungD. (2020). Assessments in CLIL: The interplay between cognitive and linguistic demands and their progression in secondary education. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23, 1192–1210.
33.
LuoW.H. (2013). A study of discourse in relation to language learning in English classes co-taught by native English-speaking teachers and local teachers in Taiwan. English Language Teaching, 6, 96–109.
34.
LuZ.LiP.DuP. (2009). Interactive patterns in an English audio-video speaking class in CALL environments. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 5, 49–66.
35.
MaY. (2012). A survey and analysis on learning strategies under a web-based learning environment. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life Long Learning, 22(1–2), 97–107.
36.
MarasiniN.C. (2019). Teaching English language through literature. NUTA Journal, 6(1–2), 28–31.
37.
NandaC. (2021). Forensic linguistics: Latitude and limitations. The English classroom. Regional Institute of English, South India
38.
ÖztürkE.O. (2016). Types of questions used in EFL classrooms: A reflective study on a Turkish EFL teacher’s practices. International Journal of Language Academy, 4, 167–173.
39.
PerdaniY.D. (2021). The English language teachers’ perspective of using the first language (L1) in teaching a foreign language (TEFL) class. Lingua Cultura, 15, 59–66.
40.
PyoK.H. (2009). The relationship between students’ perceptions of teaching English through English and their achievement. English Teaching, 64, 95–108.
41.
PunJ.K. (2021). Research conducted on classroom interaction in the English Medium Instruction context. In PunJ.K.H.CurleS.M. (Eds.), Research methods in English medium instruction (pp. 16–31). Routledge.
42.
RahmawatiI.N. (2015). The use of L1 in the English classroom. English Education: Jurnal Tadris Bahasa Inggris, 8, 39–54.
43.
ReddyS. (2012). Importance of English and different methods of teaching English. Journal of Business Management & Social Sciences Research, 1, 25–28.
44.
ReedN.D. (2020). Teacher views of teaching English through English (TETE) in Japanese junior high schools: Findings from the inside. The Language Teacher, 44, 35–42.
45.
RichardsJ.C. (2017). Teaching English through English: Proficiency, pedagogy and performance. RELC Journal, 48, 7–30.
46.
RohmahT. (2017). Classroom interaction in English language class for students of economics education. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 8, 192–207.
47.
RuanY. (2023). Investigating reading comprehension strategies among English language learners in middle schools: A systematic review. In 2023 7th international seminar on education, management and social sciences (ISEMSS 2023) (pp. 169–177). Atlantis Press.
SalehM. (2016). Classroom interaction patterns in higher education. English Education Journal, 6, 10–16.
50.
Sánchez-GarcíaD. (2016). A contrastive analysis of Spanish- and English-medium instruction in tertiary education: Teacher discourse strategies in a spoken corpus. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain.
51.
Sánchez-GarcíaD. (2020). Mapping lecturer questions and their pedagogical goals in Spanish- and English-medium instruction. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 8, 28–52.
52.
Serna-BermejoI.LasagabasterD. (2024). Teacher questions: A comparative analysis between English-medium and Basque-medium lessons at university. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 34, 86–102.
53.
SundariH. (2017). Classroom interaction in teaching English as foreign language at lower secondary schools in Indonesia. Advances in language and Literary Studies, 8, 147–154.
54.
SwellerJ. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285.
55.
TaiK. W. (2025). Transitioning from L1 medium of instruction to L2 English medium instruction: The role of translanguaging in contributing to EFL students’ language learning motivation. International Journal of Applied Linguistics1–24.
56.
TienC.Y. (2009). Conflict and accommodation in classroom codeswitching in Taiwan. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 12, 173–192.
57.
TjallaM.SyamsirM.ZulfahZ.SunubiA.H.ArqamA. (2023). Exploring classroom interaction patterns in EFL virtual learning. English Review: Journal of English Education, 11, 283–292.
58.
VygotskyL.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
59.
WuC.W.ChenP.C. (2017). English learning beliefs of EFL vocational high school learners. IMPACT: International Journal of Research in Humanities, Arts and Literature (IMPACT: IJRHAL), 5, 43–54.
60.
YukselD.YuM. (2008). Inside the classroom: Teacher and student questions in a foreign language literature class. TESL Reporter, 41, 12–32.
61.
ZulfikarZ. (2019). Rethinking the use of L1 in L2 classroom. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 6, 42–51.
