Authority and authenticity in teachers’ questions about literature in three contexts

S. Levine, Mary E. Hauser, Michael W. Smith
{"title":"Authority and authenticity in teachers’ questions about literature in three contexts","authors":"S. Levine, Mary E. Hauser, Michael W. Smith","doi":"10.1108/etpc-03-2021-0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to explore the authentic questioning practices of English Language Arts teachers. Although language arts (LA) education emphasizes the value of authentic questions in discussions about literature, teachers still tend to ask known-answer questions that guide students toward one literary interpretation. However, outside their classrooms, teachers talk about literary texts from stances of openness and curiosity. Helping teachers recognize and draw on their out-of-school literary practices might help them disrupt entrenched known-answer discourses. The authors studied how the same teachers asked questions about literature in different settings. The authors asked: To what degree and in what ways did teachers’ questions about literature change when they took on different roles in discussions of literature?\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nDrawing on theories of classroom discourses and everyday practices, this study compared and analyzed types of questions asked by high school teachers as they took on three roles: teacher in the high school classroom, discussion leader in a professional development and everyday reader in discussion.\n\n\nFindings\nAnalysis showed that as participants moved further away from their teacher role, they were more likely to ask authentic, curiosity-driven questions that engaged fellow readers in exploratory, dialogic interpretation. They were less likely to attempt to maintain authority over students’ interpretations.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe authors hope researchers will build on these explorations of teacher stances and language in different roles, so we can work toward disrupt entrenched known-answer discourses in the classroom.\n\n\nPractical implications\nDrawing on this study’s findings about questioning practices of participants in their role as reader (as opposed to discussion leader or classroom teacher), the authors suggest that teachers and teacher educators consider the following: First, teachers need to understand the power of interpretive authority and known-answer discourses and compare them explicitly to their own everyday practices through rehearsals and reflection. Second, teachers might focus less on theme and more on exploration of individual lines, patterns and unusual authorial moves. Finally, when preparing to teach, if teachers can reconnect with the stance and language of uncertainty and curiosity, they are likely to ask more authentic questions.\n\n\nSocial implications\nThese findings suggest both the power of entrenched known-answer discourses to constrain and the potential power of making visible and drawing on teachers’ literary reading practices in out-of-school contexts.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, no studies have made an empirical comparison of the relationship between the role a teacher takes on during discussion and the kinds of questions they ask about literature. This study offers insight into the value of everyday curiosity and other out-of-school resources that teachers could – but often do not – bring to their facilitations of classroom discussions. The findings suggest that teachers, teacher educators and researchers must recognize and recruit teachers’ everyday practices to the LA classroom.\n","PeriodicalId":428767,"journal":{"name":"English Teaching: Practice & Critique","volume":"91 34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Teaching: Practice & Critique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/etpc-03-2021-0021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to explore the authentic questioning practices of English Language Arts teachers. Although language arts (LA) education emphasizes the value of authentic questions in discussions about literature, teachers still tend to ask known-answer questions that guide students toward one literary interpretation. However, outside their classrooms, teachers talk about literary texts from stances of openness and curiosity. Helping teachers recognize and draw on their out-of-school literary practices might help them disrupt entrenched known-answer discourses. The authors studied how the same teachers asked questions about literature in different settings. The authors asked: To what degree and in what ways did teachers’ questions about literature change when they took on different roles in discussions of literature? Design/methodology/approach Drawing on theories of classroom discourses and everyday practices, this study compared and analyzed types of questions asked by high school teachers as they took on three roles: teacher in the high school classroom, discussion leader in a professional development and everyday reader in discussion. Findings Analysis showed that as participants moved further away from their teacher role, they were more likely to ask authentic, curiosity-driven questions that engaged fellow readers in exploratory, dialogic interpretation. They were less likely to attempt to maintain authority over students’ interpretations. Research limitations/implications The authors hope researchers will build on these explorations of teacher stances and language in different roles, so we can work toward disrupt entrenched known-answer discourses in the classroom. Practical implications Drawing on this study’s findings about questioning practices of participants in their role as reader (as opposed to discussion leader or classroom teacher), the authors suggest that teachers and teacher educators consider the following: First, teachers need to understand the power of interpretive authority and known-answer discourses and compare them explicitly to their own everyday practices through rehearsals and reflection. Second, teachers might focus less on theme and more on exploration of individual lines, patterns and unusual authorial moves. Finally, when preparing to teach, if teachers can reconnect with the stance and language of uncertainty and curiosity, they are likely to ask more authentic questions. Social implications These findings suggest both the power of entrenched known-answer discourses to constrain and the potential power of making visible and drawing on teachers’ literary reading practices in out-of-school contexts. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no studies have made an empirical comparison of the relationship between the role a teacher takes on during discussion and the kinds of questions they ask about literature. This study offers insight into the value of everyday curiosity and other out-of-school resources that teachers could – but often do not – bring to their facilitations of classroom discussions. The findings suggest that teachers, teacher educators and researchers must recognize and recruit teachers’ everyday practices to the LA classroom.
三种语境下教师文学问题的权威性与真实性
目的探讨英语语言艺术教师的真实提问实践。虽然语言艺术(LA)教育强调文学讨论中真实问题的价值,但教师仍然倾向于提出已知答案的问题,引导学生走向一种文学解释。然而,在课堂之外,老师们从开放和好奇的角度谈论文学文本。帮助教师认识和利用他们的校外文学实践可能有助于他们打破根深蒂固的已知答案话语。作者研究了同一位老师在不同的环境下如何提问文学问题。作者问道:当教师在文学讨论中扮演不同的角色时,他们对文学的提问在多大程度上以及以何种方式发生了变化?设计/方法/方法借鉴课堂话语理论和日常实践,本研究比较和分析了高中教师在扮演三种角色时提出的问题类型:高中课堂上的教师,专业发展中的讨论领导者和讨论中的日常读者。研究结果分析显示,随着参与者逐渐远离教师角色,他们更有可能提出真实的、好奇心驱使的问题,让其他读者进行探索性的、对话式的解读。他们不太可能试图对学生的解释保持权威。研究的局限/启示作者希望研究者们能在这些关于教师立场和不同角色的语言的探索的基础上继续努力,这样我们就可以努力打破课堂上根深蒂固的已知答案话语。根据本研究关于参与者作为读者(而不是讨论领导者或课堂教师)的提问实践的发现,作者建议教师和教师教育者考虑以下几点:首先,教师需要理解解释权威和已知答案话语的力量,并通过排练和反思将其与自己的日常实践进行明确的比较。其次,教师可能会减少对主题的关注,更多地关注对个别线条、模式和不同寻常的作者动作的探索。最后,在准备教学时,如果教师能够重新连接到不确定和好奇的立场和语言,他们可能会提出更真实的问题。社会意义这些发现表明,根深蒂固的已知答案话语对约束的力量,以及在校外环境中使教师的文学阅读实践可见和借鉴的潜在力量。原创性/价值据作者所知,没有研究对教师在讨论中所扮演的角色与他们提出的文学问题之间的关系进行实证比较。这项研究揭示了日常好奇心和其他校外资源的价值,这些资源是教师可以——但往往没有——用来促进课堂讨论的。研究结果表明,教师、教师教育者和研究人员必须认识到并将教师的日常实践纳入洛杉矶课堂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信