Differences between low and high achievers in whole-classroom dialogue participation quality

IF 4.7 1区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Learning and Instruction Pub Date : 2025-01-27 DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102088

Edith Bouton, Dina Yosef, Christa S.C. Asterhan

{"title":"Differences between low and high achievers in whole-classroom dialogue participation quality","authors":"Edith Bouton, Dina Yosef, Christa S.C. Asterhan","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Academically productive dialogue activities in classrooms aspire to be inclusive, such that students of all capabilities participate meaningfully and equally in discussions.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>We empirically examine the extent to which this aspiration is achieved regarding students of different prior achievement levels.</div></div><div><h3>Sample</h3><div>Low- (<em>N</em> = 33), mid- (<em>N</em> = 90), and high-achieving (<em>N</em> = 22) upper elementary students participated in whole-classroom discussions around texts, facilitated by six highly motivated, trained teachers.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Based on a quantitative ethnography approach, we coded 5975 separate speech turns and compared aggregated differences across the three subgroups using Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Whereas no differences were found in amount of speech turns, statistically significant differences were found in the quality of participation: Low-achievers' discussion participation was characterized by recitation-style talk, reduced network connectivity, and repetitive loops, compared to higher connectivity and more complex argumentative reasoning in their high-achieving classmates' network model. A follow-up qualitative analysis uncovered some of the social dynamics behind this inferior participation pattern, and highlighted the potentially stymieing behavior of peers.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The findings underscore the need for more empirical research that takes into account differences in quality of student participation in dialogic activities and the reasons behind it.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":"96 ","pages":"Article 102088"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475225000118","RegionNum":1,"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

Background

Academically productive dialogue activities in classrooms aspire to be inclusive, such that students of all capabilities participate meaningfully and equally in discussions.

Aim

We empirically examine the extent to which this aspiration is achieved regarding students of different prior achievement levels.

Sample

Low- (N = 33), mid- (N = 90), and high-achieving (N = 22) upper elementary students participated in whole-classroom discussions around texts, facilitated by six highly motivated, trained teachers.

Method

Based on a quantitative ethnography approach, we coded 5975 separate speech turns and compared aggregated differences across the three subgroups using Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA).

Results

Whereas no differences were found in amount of speech turns, statistically significant differences were found in the quality of participation: Low-achievers' discussion participation was characterized by recitation-style talk, reduced network connectivity, and repetitive loops, compared to higher connectivity and more complex argumentative reasoning in their high-achieving classmates' network model. A follow-up qualitative analysis uncovered some of the social dynamics behind this inferior participation pattern, and highlighted the potentially stymieing behavior of peers.

Conclusion

The findings underscore the need for more empirical research that takes into account differences in quality of student participation in dialogic activities and the reasons behind it.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Learning and Instruction Multiple-

CiteScore

11.30

自引率

4.80%

发文量

109

期刊介绍： As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.