Teacher’s Dialogic Prompts That Scaffold Students’ Participation in Classroom Argumentation: A Case of a Biology Teacher

Q4 Social Sciences
S. Gutierez
{"title":"Teacher’s Dialogic Prompts That Scaffold Students’ Participation in\nClassroom Argumentation: A Case of a Biology Teacher","authors":"S. Gutierez","doi":"10.21315/apjee2021.36.1.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this qualitative case study, a male biology teacher teaching Bioethics in Senior High School was purposively selected for the documentation and examination of the types and functions of dialogic prompts he used to scaffold his students’ participation in classroom argumentation. Using various data such as classroom transcripts from audio- and video-records, interviews and field notes, these were subjected to microlevel analyses using the constant comparison method. Using an analysis framework with codes from literature that were subsequently merged with data driven codes, thematic analysis yielded three types of dialogic prompts: conceptual, analytical, and reflective with several functions such as providing background information, giving extended ‘think-time’, guiding students to formulate counterarguments, eliciting examples that either support or refute a claim, and asking issue-based questions which were sometimes backed up by stating personal arguments and reiterating students’ responses. Excerpts from video transcripts revealed that these dialogic prompts elicited students’ ideas which resulted to argumentative and collaborative inquiry. Findings of the study suggest that students’ participation to classroom argumentation should be understood together with teachers’ provision of dialogic scaffolding. More than conceptual and factual knowledge, teachers’ dialogic scaffolding for argumentation is a promising method for the gradual enhancement of students’ communication skills and honing\nof their reasoning skills. Since the results are only conclusive to the case teacher, the study informs the potentials of dialogic scaffolding to support classroom argumentation. It is therefore recommended that for future professional development efforts, both in-service and pre-service teachers should be influenced towards intentionality of harnessing talk inside the classroom as a tool to enhance the implementation of classroom argumentation.","PeriodicalId":36930,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education","volume":"50 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21315/apjee2021.36.1.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In this qualitative case study, a male biology teacher teaching Bioethics in Senior High School was purposively selected for the documentation and examination of the types and functions of dialogic prompts he used to scaffold his students’ participation in classroom argumentation. Using various data such as classroom transcripts from audio- and video-records, interviews and field notes, these were subjected to microlevel analyses using the constant comparison method. Using an analysis framework with codes from literature that were subsequently merged with data driven codes, thematic analysis yielded three types of dialogic prompts: conceptual, analytical, and reflective with several functions such as providing background information, giving extended ‘think-time’, guiding students to formulate counterarguments, eliciting examples that either support or refute a claim, and asking issue-based questions which were sometimes backed up by stating personal arguments and reiterating students’ responses. Excerpts from video transcripts revealed that these dialogic prompts elicited students’ ideas which resulted to argumentative and collaborative inquiry. Findings of the study suggest that students’ participation to classroom argumentation should be understood together with teachers’ provision of dialogic scaffolding. More than conceptual and factual knowledge, teachers’ dialogic scaffolding for argumentation is a promising method for the gradual enhancement of students’ communication skills and honing of their reasoning skills. Since the results are only conclusive to the case teacher, the study informs the potentials of dialogic scaffolding to support classroom argumentation. It is therefore recommended that for future professional development efforts, both in-service and pre-service teachers should be influenced towards intentionality of harnessing talk inside the classroom as a tool to enhance the implementation of classroom argumentation.
教师的对话提示支撑学生参与课堂辩论:以一位生物教师为例
在这项定性案例研究中,有目的地选择了一名在高中教授生物伦理学的男生物教师,对他用来支持学生参与课堂辩论的对话提示的类型和功能进行记录和检查。使用各种数据,如来自音频和视频记录的课堂记录、访谈和现场笔记,使用恒定比较方法对这些数据进行微观层面的分析。使用一个分析框架,将文献中的代码与数据驱动的代码相结合,主题分析产生了三种类型的对话提示:概念性、分析性和反思性,具有提供背景信息、延长“思考时间”、引导学生提出反驳、,引出支持或反驳某一主张的例子,并提出基于问题的问题,这些问题有时会通过陈述个人论点和重申学生的回答来支持。从视频记录中摘录的内容表明,这些对话提示引发了学生的想法,从而产生了议论文和合作探究。研究结果表明,学生对课堂辩论的参与应与教师提供的对话支架相结合。除了概念和事实知识之外,教师的对话式论证框架是一种很有前途的方法,可以逐步提高学生的沟通能力和推理能力。由于研究结果仅对案例教师具有结论性,本研究揭示了对话支架支持课堂论证的潜力。因此,建议在未来的专业发展努力中,在职和职前教师都应受到影响,将课堂内的谈话作为加强课堂论证实施的工具。
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
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信