Unembodied Multimodal Resources in Senior High School EFL Classrooms: A Multimodal Interaction Analysis

Authors

  • Mhd Reza Anwar Master’s Program in English Education, Faculty of Tarbiyah Science and Teacher Training, State Islamic University of North Sumatra Medan, Indonesia
  • Tien Rafida Master’s Program in English Education, Faculty of Tarbiyah Science and Teacher Training, State Islamic University of North Sumatra Medan, Indonesia
  • Maslathif Dwi Purnomo Master’s Program in English Education, Faculty of Tarbiyah Science and Teacher Training, State Islamic University of North Sumatra Medan, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v14i2.12243

Keywords:

unembodied multimodal resources, EFL classroom interaction, multimodal interaction analysis, meaning construction, EFL pedagogy

Abstract

This study examines how unembodied multimodal resources construct meaning in EFL classroom interaction at the senior high school level. Grounded in Sigrid Norris's Multimodal Interaction Analysis (MIA) framework and social semiotic theory (Kress & van Leeuwen, 2001, 2006), the study investigates the meaning-constructing mechanisms through which non-bodily semiotic resources such as digital video media, projected presentation slides, physical material artifacts, and environmental spatial arrangements operate in authentic EFL instruction. Data were collected through video-recorded classroom observations of an experienced English teacher at SMA Kemala Bhayangkari, North Sumatra, Indonesia, across two classroom meetings covering procedure text and argumentative text genres. Analysis of nineteen video-captured still images reveal that meaning is constructed not through any single resource in isolation but through intermodal ensembles in which projected visual content, spoken teacher language, and embodied action converge. Five key mechanisms of meaning construction are identified: intermodal complementarity, indexical anchoring through gesture, compositional organization of projected layouts, temporal sequencing of resources, and kinesthetic affordances of physical objects. The findings demonstrate that unembodied resources serve multiple integrated pedagogical functions in EFL teaching, supporting content comprehension, enabling genre-level metalinguistic analysis, and structuring classroom participation. These results affirm the fundamentally multimodal character of EFL pedagogy and offer evidence-based implications for EFL instructional design and teacher education.

References

Bezemer, J., & Kress, G. (2008). Writing in multimodal texts: A social semiotic account of designs for learning. Written Communication, 25(2), 166–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088307313177

Bezemer, J., & Kress, G. (2016). Multimodality, learning and communication: A social semiotic frame. Routledge.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(10), 1489–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X

Goodwin, C. (2007). Interactive footing. In E. Holt & R. Drew (Eds.), Reporting talk: Reported speech in interaction (pp. 16–46). Cambridge University Press.

Gullberg, M. (2006). Handling discourse: Gestures, reference tracking, and communication strategies in early L2. Language Learning, 56(1), 155–196.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. Edward Arnold.

Jewitt, C. (2008). Multimodality and literacy in school classrooms. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 241–267.

Jewitt, C. (Ed.). (2009). The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis. Routledge.

Jewitt, C. (2014). An introduction to multimodality. In C. Jewitt (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (2nd ed., pp. 15–30). Routledge.

Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press.

Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.

Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. Arnold.

Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Lim, F. V., Toh, W., & Nguyen, T. T. H. (2022). Multimodality in the English language classroom: A systematic review of literature. Linguistics and Education, 69, 101048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2022.101048

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.

Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press.

McNeill, D. (2005). Gesture and thought. University of Chicago Press.

Norris, S. (2004). Analyzing multimodal interaction: A methodological framework. Routledge.

Norris, S. (2011). Identity in (inter)action: Introducing multimodal (inter)action analysis. De Gruyter Mouton.

Qin, Y., Wang, P., & Zhang, L. J. (2021). Multimodal analysis of EFL teachers' classroom lead-ins in Chinese secondary schools. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 793495. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.793495

Wang, C. (2016). Communicative modes in instructional interaction: A multimodal analysis. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 7(4), 680–688.

Walsh, S. (2011). Exploring classroom discourse: Language in action. Routledge.

Downloads

Published

2026-08-18

Citation Check