This has been taken to its logical conclusion at Newham where a leader is running the SI session in his first language, Tamil. This has been taken to its logical conclusion at Newham where a leader is running the SI session in his first language, Tamil. This allows the SI users to understand concepts in their own language, before practicing them in English. In the less extreme cases, it may appear that if this is a mere matter of the semantic construction of a sentence, then there is no reason why traditional teachers cannot do the same. However, language is far more than simply the words used, it is also about the pragmatics of the situation, who says the words to whom, and the manner in which they are said.
SI leaders can use their language to emphasize the fact that they are students.
Teachers, however genial they are, will always be perceived as teachers, as they are in a power relationship with students. Their students know that they will be assessed by them. Thus, there is a pressure on students to behave as if they understand perfectly what is being taught, so that when the teacher is marking the student's work, they believe they believe they are marking the work of a conscientious and hard-working student. In SI, the first years know they are allowed to make mistakes. SI is something that cannot be done by teachers, as this loses the more equal power relationships, and prevents students being open about their lack of understanding.