AN ANALYSIS OF CLASSROOM INTERACTION AT VII.

4 CLASS OF SMP
LABORATORIUM UNDIKSHA SINGARAJA IN ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015

Kadek Agus Juniarta, Putu Kerti Nitiasih,

I Putu Ngurah Wage Myartawan

Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
Singaraja, Indonesia

Email: {Juniartaagenerous@yahoo.co.id, titiekjegeg@gmail.com,

Wmyartawan@gmail.com}

Abstrak
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kategori interaksi kelas yang
terjadi di kelas VII.4 di SMP Laboratorium Undiksha Singaraja berdasarkan
Flanders Interaction Analysis Categories (FIAC). Kategori interaksi yang
sering digunakan, bahasa yang dominan di gunakan dan alasan
menggunakan bahasa tersebut dalam interaksi kelas. Subjek dalam
penelitian ini yaitu guru dan siswa kelas VII. 4 sebanyak 36 siswa. Penelitian
ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif. Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan
bahwa: (1) accepts feelings terjadi sebanyak 126 ucapan, praises atau
encouragement terjadi sebanyak 177 ucapan, accepts atau uses ideas of
students terjadi sebanyak 74 ucapan, asks questions terjadi sebanyak 407
ucapan, lecturing terjadi sebanyak 230 ucapan, giving directions terjadi
sebanyak 469 ucapan, criticizing atau justifying authority terjadi sebanyak 80
ucapan, students’ talk response terjadi sebanyak 348 ucapan, students’ talk
initiation terjadi sebanyak 79 ucapan, silence atau confusion terjadi sebanyak
226 ucapan. Kategori dari interaksi kelas yang paling sering terjadi yaitu
giving direction. Bahasa yang dominan di gunakan adalah Bahasa Indonesia
yang terjadi sebanyak 1027 ucapan sementara Bahasa Inggris terjadi
sebanyak 963 ucapan, selanjutnya alasan menggunakan Bahasa Indonesia
dalam interaksi kelas yaitu: (a) karena Bahasa Indonesia digunakan untuk
mengklarifikasi instruksi berbahasa inggris. (b) Bahasa Indonesia digunakan
untuk mengklarifikasi kata-kata asing bagi siswa. (c) Bahasa Indonesia
digunakan untuk memberikan contoh-contoh. (d) Bahasa Indonesia
digunakan untuk mengkritisi tingkah laku negatif siswa. (e) Bahasa Indonesia
digunakan untuk memberikan feedback. (f) Bahasa Indonesia digunakan
untuk bertanya.

Kata Kunci: Interaksi Kelas, Flanders Interaction Analysis Categories (FIAC).

Abstract
This research aimed at analyzing the classroom interaction category occurred
at VII. 4 class of SMP Laboratorium Undiksha Singaraja based on Flanders
Interaction Analysis Categories (FIAC). The category which mostly used, the
dominant language used and the reasons to use it. The subjects of the
research were a teacher and 36 students of VII.4 class. This research
employed qualitative research.
 The results of this research showed that: (1) accepts feelings occurred 126
utterances, praises or encouragement occurred 177 utterances, accepts or
uses ideas of students occurred 74 utterances, asks questions occurred 407
utterances, lecturing occurred 230 utterances, giving directions occurred 469
utterances, criticizing or justifying authority occurred 80 utterances, students’
talk response occurred 348 utterances, students’ talk initiation occurred 79
utterances, silence or confusion occurred 226 utterances. (2) The category
that mostly occurred was giving direction. (3) The dominant language used
was Bahasa Indonesia which occurred 1027 utterances while English
occurred 963 utterances, furthermore the reasons of using Bahasa Indonesia
during classroom interaction were: (a) because Bahasa Indonesia was used to
clarify English instruction. (b) Bahasa Indonesia was used to clarify unfamiliar
words. (c) Bahasa Indonesia was used to give examples. (d) Bahasa
Indonesia was used to criticize students’ bad behavior. (e) Bahasa Indonesia
was used to give feedback. (f) Bahasa Indonesia was used to ask questions.

Key words: Classroom Interaction, Flanders Interaction Analysis Categories

(FIAC).

INTRODUCTION Western societies spend significant

English is very important to learn by
Indonesian students because of the role of
English as the key to access the science,
as a worldwide language, and as a means
to enjoy art (Akbar, 2013). It is also very
important to be taught for students in order
they have a good competency in using
language for the purpose of
communication.
Communication in the classroom can
be built through interaction. According to
Brown (2000) interaction is the
collaborative exchange of thoughts,
feelings, or ideas between two or more
people, resulting in reciprocal effect on
each other. Through interaction, students
can increase their language store as they
listen or read authentic material, or even
the output of their friends in discussion or
in problem solving-tasks and in the
dialogue. Moreover, Dagarin (2004) states
that effective classroom interaction has
two implications. The first, it concerns a
pleasant environment or atmosphere in
the classroom with friendly relationships
among the participants of learning
process. The second, it encourages
students to become effective
communicators in learning a foreign
language. If the two implications are
applied in effective way, it can establish a
pleasant classroom atmosphere.
resources to promote a student-centered
approach at all levels of education. A
variety of different approaches have been
developed under the umbrella of the
student-centered approach (Sablonniere,
et al., 2009). Furthermore, they explain in
students-centered approach, the learner
has the responsibility to accommodate the
learning process to his/her own unique
learning style in order to structure his/her
own learning. The teacher’s role is that of
a guide who assists the learner in the
difficult process of constructing his/her
individual system of knowledge. Moreover,
Applebaum (2007) states that the use of
student-centered approach allows the
students to use the target language in an
authentic and realistic way. Based on the
explanations above, it can be said that
students-centered approach is useful
approach to teach students in order they
have many opportunities to use target
language and learn in authentic way.
In Indonesia, most of teachers are
still using teacher-centered approaches in
their classroom (Applebaum, 2007). They
follow the philosophy that “If you are not
lecturing, you are not teaching.” However,
many students are usually bored in class
and are not given the opportunity to
practice what they learn.
Furthermore, Bjork in Zulfikar (2009)
states that teacher-centered class
instruction is deeply embedded in
Indonesian school settings; this type of
instruction has become a part in the
Indonesian school culture.
Based on the explanation above, the
teachers are expected to use students-
centered approach to establish effective
learning, one of them is effective
classroom interaction. Furthermore, the
use of technology during learning process
such as internet, computer, LCD projector
can enable students to become more
active and independent learners and
establish students-teacher interaction.
Based on the preliminary observation
during teaching and learning process at
SMP Laboratorium Undiksha, the
classroom interaction was dominated by
the teacher. This reflects interaction in the
classroom is not balanced yet. Thus, the
classroom interaction was observed during
teaching and learning process in VII 4
class of SMP Laboratorium Undiksha
Singaraja to get some references about
teacher’s talk and students’ talk. So that,
the results of this study can be used to
develop and evaluate interactive language
teaching for foreign language classes.
The research questions of this study
are: (1) What are the categories of
classroom interaction found during
teaching and learning process at VII 4
class of SMP Laboratorium Undiksha
Singaraja? (2) What is the dominant
category of classroom interaction mostly
used during teaching and learning process
at VII 4 class of SMP Laboratorium
Undiksha Singaraja? (3) What is the
dominant language of classroom
interaction used during teaching and
learning process at VII 4 class of SMP
Laboratorium Undiksha Singaraja and
why? Through observation and analysis,
based on Flanders Interaction Analysis
Categories, the results of the study are
expected to be useful for the teachers in
order to be able to enrich their knowledge
about establishing effective classroom
interaction in teaching English for foreign
language (TEFL).
Moreover, the results of the study can be
used as reflection or evaluation for the
English teachers toward their own
teaching practice.
METHOD
This study was conducted at SMP
Laboratorium Undiksha Singaraja. There
were several reasons of selecting SMP
Laboratorium Undiksha Singaraja as the
subjects of the research, they are: (1) it is
favorite and famous school in Singaraja-
Bali. (2) Most of teachers have already
qualified (certificated). (3) This school has
good facilities in supporting English
course. Furthermore, the reason of
selecting VII grade as the research subject
was to know the basic grade of classroom
interaction in junior high school which in
this level is the fundamental learning for
students before they go to the next grade.
The subjects of the study were the
teacher and the students of VII.4 class at
SMP Laboratorium Undiksha Singaraja in
academic year 2014/2015. The teacher
name is Made Irse Niopani, S.Pd.
The data was collected by observing
and recording the interaction during the
teaching and learning process in the
classroom. The procedures in collecting
the data were: (1) the researcher asked
permission to the headmaster. (2) The
researcher discussed the schedule of
observation with the teacher. (3) The
researcher made agreement to the
teacher by asking teacher to sign consent
form. (4) The researcher conducted
observation. (5) The data was described
and analyzed based on Flanders
Instruction Analysis Categories.
The data was analyzed by using
theory from Miles and Huberman (1994,
pp. 10-12). The data analysis involves
data collection, data reduction, data
display, and conclusion
drawing/verification. The first step, the
researcher conducted the observation by
using handycam to record teacher’s talk
and students’ talk. Besides of that, the
researcher obtained the data by using
note taking to note teacher’s talk and
students’ talk and related data. The
second step, the researcher transcribed
the data of observation.
The third step, the researcher interviewed
the teacher to fulfill the data. Fourth, the
data was reduced by eliminating the data
that were not categorized as teacher’s
talk, and students’ talk. Fifth step, the data
was displayed using coding system. The
last, the researcher drew the conclusion
based on the researcher’s interpretation
and Flanders Interaction Analysis
Categories. The researcher used
methodological triangulation that proposes
by Denzin in Bryman (2011).
Methodological triangulation refers to the
use of more than one method for gathering
data (Denzin in Bryman, 2011). In this
research, the researcher conducted
observation, interview, record classroom
interaction through video recorder and
take a note which related to the data.
Table 1. Frequencies of Classroom Interaction
No Category
1 Accepts Feelings
2 Praises or Encouragement
3 Accepts or Uses Ideas of Students
4 Asks Questions
5 Lecturing
6 Giving Directions
7 Criticizing or Justifying Authority
8 Students’ Talk Response
9 Students’ Talk Initiation
10 Silence or Confusion
TOTAL
Table 1 showed that the frequencies of
each category of classroom interaction
based on Flanders Interaction Analysis
categories that occurred in VII.4 class of
SMP Laboratorium Undiksha in all
meetings during teaching and learning
process.
The following were examples of classroom
interaction categories found during
classroom observation. The first category
of Flanders Interaction Analysis Categories
is accepts feelings. The teacher accepts the
feelings of the students in which the
feelings may be positive or negative and
So that the results of the data were
gathered from different perspectives and it
could be trusted and valid.
FINDING AND DISCUSSION
Based on the accumulation data of
this study, all categories of Flanders
Interaction Analysis Categories occurred in
all meetings during teaching and learning
process at VII.4 class of SMP
Laboratorium Undiksha Singaraja. The
following is the table of frequency of
classroom interaction categories which is
formulated based on the observation that
was conducted at VII.4 class of SMP
Laboratorium Undiksha Singaraja.
Frequency Percentage
126 5.69 %
177 7.99 %
74 3.34 %
407 18.37 %
230 10.38 %
469 21.16 %
80 3.61 %
348 15.7 %
79 3.56 %
226 10.2 %
2216 100 %
their prediction and recalling feeling are
included. Accepts feelings occurred on 126
utterances with the percentage 5.69 %. The
teacher uttered this category when: (1) she
asked students’ condition. (2) She greeted
students in the beginning of the lesson. (3)
She asked students’ readiness before
performing or doing something. (4) She
asked students to have a break. (5) She
asked students to pray. (6) She asked
students to help their friends in a group. (7)
She ensured that students have finished
their works. (8) She asked students’
problems. (9) She gave chance for students
to practice. (10) She gave suggestions.
Praises or encouragement is teacher
praises and encourages students’ action or
behavior. When students are be able to
answer teacher’s questions, the teacher
gives positive reinforcement by saying
words like good, very good, brilliant,
excellent, good job, etc. Based on the table
1, there were 177 utterances with the
percentage 7.99 %. The teacher uttered this
category when: (1) Students did
assignment satisfactorily or did good
performance. (2) She encouraged students
to do or finish the tasks. (3). She
appreciated what students have done. (4)
She repeated students’ answer and their
answer was correct.
Accepts or uses ideas of students is
the teacher accepts, clarifies or develops
students’ ideas. When the students give
some ideas to the teacher, the teacher may
repeat in his/her style. The obtained data
showed that there were 74 utterances with
the percentage 3.34 %. The teacher uttered
this category when: (1) she accepted or
used students’ answer or idea by repeating
students’ answer. (2) She accepted or used
students’ ideas by translating it.
(3) She accepted or used students’ idea by
clarifying it. (4) She accepted or used
students’ idea by interpreting and
summarizing it.
Asks questions is the teacher asks
questions about the materials or contents
and procedures to the students. Based on
the data obtained, there were 407
utterances with the percentage 18.37 %.
The teacher uttered this category when: (1)
she asked the questions about materials
taught. (2) She asked students to recall
their prior knowledge. (3) She asked
students to tell or explain something. (4)
She asked students about unclear materials.
(5) She asked the students to participate in
learning activity. (6) She asked the
students’ opinions.
Lecturing is the teacher gives facts or
opinions about content or procedure
expression of his/her own ideas, giving
his/her own explanation or citing an
authority other than a student. Based on the
data obtained, there were 230 utterances
with the percentage 10.38 %.
The teacher uttered this category when: (1)
she explained the materials taught. (2) She
gave the examples about the materials
taught. (3) She gave her opinions about the
materials taught. (4) She taught
pronunciation. (5) She gave facts about the
materials taught.
Giving directions is the teacher gives
directions, commands or orders or
initiation in which a student is expected to
run or perform the command of the
teacher. The data obtained of giving
directions, there were 469 utterances with
the percentage 21.16 %. The teacher
uttered this category when: (1) she wanted
the students to focus to the lesson. (2) She
wanted the students to participate in the
classroom activity. (3) She wanted the
students to learn from the teacher, like
learned about pronunciation. (4) She
wanted to create a good atmosphere. (5)
She gave signal to finish the task given. (6)
She wanted the students to understand the
teacher’s instruction.
(7) She controlled students’ behavior in the
classroom. (8) She borrowed something.
(9) She closed the lesson.
Criticizing or justifying authority is
the statement which intends to change
students’ behavior. The teacher intends to
change students’ bad behavior into good
behavior by criticizing or justifying their
behavior. This category occurred 80
utterances with the percentage 3.61 %. The
teacher uttered this category when: (1) she
criticized the students that were too noisy
in classroom. (2) She criticized the
students who played in classroom. (3) She
criticized the students who said the answer
of the task given. (4) She criticized the
students who broke the rules of instruction
given. (5) She criticized the students who
talked too much with their friends during
learning process. (6) She criticized the
students who did not focus to the learning.
Students’ talk response is the
students’ response when the teacher talks.
It occurs when the teacher asks questions
to the students, then students directly
response to answer the teacher’s questions.
This category occurred 348 utterances with
the percentage 15.7 %. The students
uttered this category when: (1) the students
answered teacher’s questions. (2) The
students repeated teacher’s pronunciation.
(3) The students responded the teacher’s
direction or instruction. (4) The students
asked questions that solicited by the
teacher. (5) The students express their
happiness.
Students’ talk initiation is the
students have the initiative to answer
teacher’s questions. Students express their
own ideas, initiating a new topic; freedom
to develop opinions. Based on the data
obtained of students’ talk initiation, there
were 79 utterances with the percentage
3.58 %. The students uttered this category
when: (1) they asked questions to the
teacher by their initiation. (2) They did
presentation. (3) They stated their opinion.
Silence or confusion is pauses
situation, short periods of silence and
period of confusion in which
communication cannot be understood by
the observer. Based on the data obtained
of silence or confusion, there were 226
utterances with the percentage 10.2%.
Silence or confusion frequently occurred
during classroom observation, there were
several reasons of why it was frequently
occurred during learning process. They
were as follows: (1) The teacher asked
students to clean the board, prepare the
LCD or she might prepare laptop, or
materials. (2) Silence or confusion
occurred when the students were not
ready to participate in the classroom
activity or they might be reluctant to
participate in classroom activity like
reading the passage. (3) Silence or
confusion occurred when the students
could not answer the teacher’s questions.
(4) Silence or confusion occurred when
the students were still worked the task
given although the time was up. When the
teacher asked to submit their work, but the
students were silence. (5) Silence or
confusion occurred when the teacher
criticized students’ bad behavior. When the
teacher criticized them, usually students
were silence. (6) Silence or confusion
occurred when the teacher prepared the
equipments or materials to play a game
and when the teacher asked the students
to form a group. (7) Silence or confusion
occurred when the students played a
game or worked in a group. It included to
this category (silence or confusion), when
there were no interaction between teacher
and students, so that it recorded as
silence or confusion category. (8) Silence
or confusion occurred when the students
did not understand well to the teacher’s
instruction. (9) Silence or confusion
occurred when the teacher wrote down or
point to the slide or white board without
utterances, it included pauses situation.
Based on the obtained data, it was
found that giving directions became the
dominant category in all meetings during
classroom observation at VII.4 class of
SMP Laboratorium Undiksha.
There were 469 utterances, with the
percentage 21.16%. It means that the
teacher dominated the classroom
interaction during teaching and learning
process. The teacher frequently uttered this
category in the pre-activity, whilst-activity
and post activity.
Based on the classroom observation
in the teaching and learning process at
VII.4 class of SMP Laboratorium
Undiksha, the dominant language used
was Indonesia. The total frequencies of
Indonesia language in all meetings were
1027 utterances with the percentage 51.6
%. Furthermore, English language was
also often used in the classroom
interaction; it occurred on 963 utterances
with the percentage 48.4 %.
Furthermore, based on the results of
interview and observation with the teacher,
there were several reasons of why
Indonesia was frequently used. They were
as follows:
1. Because Bahasa Indonesia was used
to clarify English instruction. Students
were often confused with the teacher’s
instructions. When the teacher gave
instructions to students, they felt
confused and silence. Students were
reluctant to ask about teacher’s
instruction to the teacher but they
asked the teacher’s instruction to their
friends. Considering that phenomena,
so the teacher often used Bahasa
Indonesia to give instructions with the
purpose to make students understand
toward the instructions given to them.
2. Bahasa Indonesia was used to clarify
unfamiliar words to students. Students
often felt confused when they did not
know the meaning of English
vocabulary in their mother tongue
(Bahasa Indonesia), so that they hard
to understand about the materials
given. Therefore, the teacher frequently
translated unfamiliar words for students
using Bahasa Indonesia in order to they
understood about the materials taught.
3. Bahasa Indonesia was used to give
examples. When the teacher gave
examples using English, students were
hard to understand about the examples
given.
So that, the teacher gave examples
using Bahasa Indonesia combined with
English.
4. Bahasa Indonesia was used to criticize
students’ bad behavior. Sometimes,
students played, talked too much and
ignored the lesson, the teacher
criticized using English but it was not
understood well by the students.
Therefore, Bahasa Indonesia was often
used to criticize students’ discipline or
bad behavior in order to they changed
their behavior into good behavior.
5. Bahasa Indonesia was used to give
feedback. Bahasa Indonesia was often
used to give feedback after the
students presented their work or
practiced the task given. The purpose
was to give evaluation toward students’
work; it expected to give valuable input
to the students’ knowledge.
6. Bahasa Indonesia was used to ask
questions. The teacher often translated
questions in English into Bahasa
Indonesia because when the teacher
gave questions in English, the students
were silence or there were no
responses. So that, the teacher
translates the questions into Bahasa
Indonesia to make students easy to
understand the questions given.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
Based on the findings and
discussion, the present study can be
concluded as follows:
1. The results of classroom observation
during three meetings showed that all
categories of Flanders Interaction
Analysis Categories (FIAC) occurred in
the teaching and learning process at
VII.4 class of SMP Laboratorium
Undiksha Singaraja. The frequency and
percentage of each category were as
follows: (1) Accepts Feelings occurred
on 126 utterances with the percentage
5.69 %. (2) Praises or Encouragement
occurred on 177 utterances with the
percentage 7.99 %. (3) Accepts or Uses
Ideas of Students was 74 with the
percentage 3.34 %. (4) Asks Questions
occurred on 407 utterances with the
percentage 18.37 %.
(5) Lecturing occurred on 230 with the
percentage 10.38 %. (6) Giving
Directions occurred on 469 utterances
with the percentage 21.16 %. (7)
Criticizing or Justifying Authority
occurred on 80 with the percentage
3.61 %. (8) Students’ Talk Response
occurred on 348 with the percentage
15.7 %. (9) Students’ Talk Initiation was
79 with the percentage 3.56 %. (10)
Silence or Confusion occurred on 226
with the percentage 10.2 %.
2. The dominant category mostly used
during classroom observation in three
meetings was giving directions. It
occurred on 469 utterances with the
percentage 21.16 %.
3. The teacher used this category when:
(1) she wanted the students to focus to
the lesson. (2) She wanted the students
to participate in the classroom activity.
 (3) She wanted the students to learn
from the teacher, like learned about
pronunciation. (4) She wanted to create
a good atmosphere. (5) She gave
signal to finish the task given. (6) She
wanted the students to understand the
teacher’s instruction. (7) She controlled
students’ behavior in the classroom. (8)
She borrowed something. (9) She
closed the lesson.
3. The dominant language mostly used
during classroom observation in all
meetings was Bahasa Indonesia.
Based on the interview and
observation, there were several
reasons to use Bahasa Indonesia in
classroom interaction. They were as
follows: (1) because Bahasa Indonesia
was used to clarify English instructions.
(2) Bahasa Indonesia was used to
clarify unfamiliar words to students. (3)
Bahasa Indonesia was used to give
examples. (4) Bahasa Indonesia was
used to criticize students’ bad behavior.
(5) Bahasa Indonesia was used to give
feedback. (6) Bahasa Indonesia was
used to ask questions.
There are several suggestions for
English teachers and for other researchers
who are interested in conducting the
similar study. They are as follows:
The teachers should provide big
opportunities for students to participate
during teaching and learning process. They
should begin to use students-centered
approach to make students more active in
the classroom learning and learn through
authentic materials. Moreover, the English
teachers should use English as the
language instruction; they only use Bahasa
Indonesia when it is really needed to make
something clear for students. So that
effective classroom interaction can be
achieved.
For Teacher Training and
Educational Institution, they should
produce good teachers by enriching them
with interaction strategies. Educational
institution should train perspective teacher
to use students-centered approach in
teaching students. So that it is expected to
establish effective classroom interaction
during learning process.
REFERENCES
Akbar, A. C. (2013). English is very
important for Indonesian students.
Retrieved from
http://acaberkaca.blogspot.com/2013/02/en
glish-is-very-important-for.html.
Applebaum, B. (2007). Communicative
language teaching: Theory,
practice, and personal
experience. MANDIRI, VOLUME 9,
NO. 4. Retrieved from
http://www.stibamalang.ac.id/uploa
dbank/pustaka/MKDU/COMMUNIC
ATIVE%20LANG.pdf.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by
principles: An interactive approach to
language pedagogy second
edition. San Francisco: Longman.
Retrieved from
https://pedufopenglish.files.wordpress.com/
2014/06/teaching-by-principles-douglas-
brown.pdf.
Dagarin, M. (2004). Classroom interaction
and communication strategies in
learning English as a foreign.
University of Ljubljana. Retrieved
from
http://www.sdas.edus.si/Elope/P
DF/ElopeVol1Dagarin.pdf.
Miles, M. B & Huberman, A. M. (1994).
Qualitative data analysis. New
Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Retrieved from
http://dl.lux.bookfi.org/genesis/449000/f3b94
2234a4f871dabbbce6ac7ca928e/_as/
%5B MatthewB._Miles,Michael_Huberman%5D
Qualitative_D(BookFi.org).pdf.
Sablonniere, R. D., et.,al. (2009).
Challenges of applying a student-
centered approach to learning in
the context of education in
Kyrgyzstan. International Journal
of Educational Development.
Retrieved from
http://www.mapageweb.umontreal.
 ca/delasabr/publications/de%20la
%20Sablonniere,%20Taylor,%20%
26%20Sadykova%20(IJED,%20in
%20press).pdf.
Zulfikar, T. (2009). The making of
Indonesian education: An
overview on empowering
Indonesian teachers. Journal of
Indonesian Social Sciences and
Humanities. Retrieved from
https://www.google.co.id/url?sa=
t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c
d=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3
A%2F%2Fdspace.library.uu.nl%2F
bitstream%2Fhandle%2F1874%2F
185067%2F7672-10413
1PB.pdf%3Fsequence%3D2&ei=1
PpKVaqhEpWPuASPx4HQCQ&us
g=AFQjCNHazPTT eE4rXJfQj-
0Uve2zHoYSTA.