{"title":"Research on the correlation between teacher classroom questioning types and student thinking development from the perspective of discourse analysis","authors":"Xiarizhati Niyazi, Xiaopeng Wu","doi":"10.1007/s11251-024-09683-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Discourse analysis, as a mainstream research method in classroom teaching, has gained widespread attention in education. Educators believe that children's thinking development requires support from interactive discourse. In this study, four primary school mathematics classes were segmented based on the form, frequency, content, and purpose of teacher-student interactions. A total of 73 dialogue segments were selected for coding, resulting in 338 codes. The coding process was based on the turn of talk and assigned corresponding coding numbers to the content of teacher-student discourse in the fragments according to the Bloom-Turney teaching questioning code list and the Hierarchical Framework of Student Thinking Level based on Biggs-Collis Structure of the observed learning outcome. The results show that Knowledge level question (Q1), Understanding level question (Q2), Application level question (Q3), Synthesis level question (Q5), and Evaluation level question (Q6) are related to students' low-level thinking. The questions of Analysis level (Q4), Synthesis level (Q5), and Evaluation level (Q6) are related to students' high-level thinking. We found that there are variety of interactive structures between teachers and students in the question and answer session, among which three interaction structures show significant performance, namely Q2 → M (Multiple-point structural level) → Q4 → C (Correlational structural level), Q3 → M → Q4 → C, Q3 → M → Q6 → A (Abstract-extension level), these structures can show how teachers timely adjust the types of questions according to students' answers to improve students' thinking level.</p>","PeriodicalId":47990,"journal":{"name":"Instructional Science","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Instructional Science","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-024-09683-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Discourse analysis, as a mainstream research method in classroom teaching, has gained widespread attention in education. Educators believe that children's thinking development requires support from interactive discourse. In this study, four primary school mathematics classes were segmented based on the form, frequency, content, and purpose of teacher-student interactions. A total of 73 dialogue segments were selected for coding, resulting in 338 codes. The coding process was based on the turn of talk and assigned corresponding coding numbers to the content of teacher-student discourse in the fragments according to the Bloom-Turney teaching questioning code list and the Hierarchical Framework of Student Thinking Level based on Biggs-Collis Structure of the observed learning outcome. The results show that Knowledge level question (Q1), Understanding level question (Q2), Application level question (Q3), Synthesis level question (Q5), and Evaluation level question (Q6) are related to students' low-level thinking. The questions of Analysis level (Q4), Synthesis level (Q5), and Evaluation level (Q6) are related to students' high-level thinking. We found that there are variety of interactive structures between teachers and students in the question and answer session, among which three interaction structures show significant performance, namely Q2 → M (Multiple-point structural level) → Q4 → C (Correlational structural level), Q3 → M → Q4 → C, Q3 → M → Q6 → A (Abstract-extension level), these structures can show how teachers timely adjust the types of questions according to students' answers to improve students' thinking level.
期刊介绍：
Instructional Science, An International Journal of the Learning Sciences, promotes a deeper understanding of the nature, theory, and practice of learning and of environments in which learning occurs. The journal’s conception of learning, as well as of instruction, is broad, recognizing that there are many ways to stimulate and support learning. The journal encourages submission of research papers, covering a variety of perspectives from the learning sciences and learning, by people of all ages, in all areas of the curriculum, in technologically rich or lean environments, and in informal and formal learning contexts. Emphasizing reports of original empirical research, the journal provides space for full and detailed reporting of major studies. Regardless of the topic, papers published in the journal all make an explicit contribution to the science of learning and instruction by drawing out the implications for the design and implementation of learning environments. We particularly encourage the submission of papers that highlight the interaction between learning processes and learning environments, focus on meaningful learning, and recognize the role of context. Papers are characterized by methodological variety that ranges, for example, from experimental studies in laboratory settings, to qualitative studies, to design-based research in authentic learning settings. The Editors will occasionally invite experts to write a review article on an important topic in the field. When review articles are considered for publication, they must deal with central issues in the domain of learning and learning environments. The journal accepts replication studies. Such a study should replicate an important and seminal finding in the field, from a study which was originally conducted by a different research group. Most years, Instructional Science publishes a guest-edited thematic special issue on a topic central to the journal''s scope. Proposals for special issues can be sent to the Editor-in-Chief. Proposals will be discussed in Spring and Fall of each year, and the proposers will be notified afterwards. To be considered for the Spring and Fall discussion, proposals should be sent to the Editor-in-Chief by March 1 and October 1, respectively. Please note that articles that are submitted for a special issue will follow the same review process as regular articles.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
