Like a conductor: whole-class discussion in English classrooms

IF 0.8 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Todd Reynolds
{"title":"Like a conductor: whole-class discussion in English classrooms","authors":"Todd Reynolds","doi":"10.1108/etpc-04-2019-0053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nAfter interviewing teachers about their beliefs on discussion, the author observed four English teachers as they led class discussions. The purpose of this study is to see what kinds of discussion were happening, and what teachers were doing to facilitate those discussions.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe author observed six English class sessions with discussion as a technique and transcribed each. To analyze the discussion events (DEs), the author focused on the addressivity of the teachers’ comments, and plotted the DEs on a four-quadrant system of analysis. The quadrants helped to move beyond the value-laden dichotomy between monologic and dialogic discussion, and to better understand what teachers are doing.\n\n\nFindings\nThe majority of class sessions were classified as convergent-active but teachers used a variety of discussions. In particular, teachers were concerned about control, so they used three techniques to keep procedural control as follows: taking over the discussion, creating specific procedures and using the Initiation-Response-Evaluation format in different ways.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nInstead of focusing on a dichotomy this method of analysis opens up the possibility for labeling different kinds of dialogic instruction, like the teacher-as-conductor form of convergent-active discussions. This can help teachers understand that addressivity and purpose matter as they create their discussions but also that various forms of discussion are necessary in the classroom. Incorporating dialogic instruction has been difficult for teachers; this method can help describe what they are doing while not devaluing the kinds of discussion that are taking place.\n","PeriodicalId":45885,"journal":{"name":"English Teaching-Practice and Critique","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Teaching-Practice and Critique","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/etpc-04-2019-0053","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Purpose After interviewing teachers about their beliefs on discussion, the author observed four English teachers as they led class discussions. The purpose of this study is to see what kinds of discussion were happening, and what teachers were doing to facilitate those discussions. Design/methodology/approach The author observed six English class sessions with discussion as a technique and transcribed each. To analyze the discussion events (DEs), the author focused on the addressivity of the teachers’ comments, and plotted the DEs on a four-quadrant system of analysis. The quadrants helped to move beyond the value-laden dichotomy between monologic and dialogic discussion, and to better understand what teachers are doing. Findings The majority of class sessions were classified as convergent-active but teachers used a variety of discussions. In particular, teachers were concerned about control, so they used three techniques to keep procedural control as follows: taking over the discussion, creating specific procedures and using the Initiation-Response-Evaluation format in different ways. Originality/value Instead of focusing on a dichotomy this method of analysis opens up the possibility for labeling different kinds of dialogic instruction, like the teacher-as-conductor form of convergent-active discussions. This can help teachers understand that addressivity and purpose matter as they create their discussions but also that various forms of discussion are necessary in the classroom. Incorporating dialogic instruction has been difficult for teachers; this method can help describe what they are doing while not devaluing the kinds of discussion that are taking place.
像指挥一样:在英语课堂上进行全班讨论
目的在采访了教师对讨论的看法后,作者观察了四位英语教师领导课堂讨论的情况。本研究的目的是了解发生了哪些类型的讨论,以及教师正在做些什么来促进这些讨论。设计/方法/方法作者观察了六堂以讨论为技巧的英语课,并将每堂课都记录下来。为了分析讨论事件,笔者将重点放在教师评论的称呼性上,并将讨论事件绘制在四象限分析系统上。象限有助于超越一元和对话讨论之间的价值二分法,并更好地理解教师在做什么。研究结果:大多数课堂被归类为趋同型,但老师们使用了各种各样的讨论。教师特别关注控制,因此他们使用了三种技术来保持程序控制:接管讨论,制定具体的程序,以不同的方式使用发起-反应-评估格式。原创性/价值这种分析方法不是专注于二分法,而是为标记不同类型的对话教学开辟了可能性,比如教师作为引导形式的聚合积极讨论。这可以帮助教师理解,在他们创建讨论时,称呼和目的很重要,但在课堂上,各种形式的讨论是必要的。对教师来说,融入对话教学一直很困难;这种方法可以帮助描述他们正在做什么,而不会贬低正在进行的各种讨论。
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
1.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: English Teaching: Practice and Critique seeks to promote research and theory related to English literacy that is grounded in a range of contexts: classrooms, schools and wider educational constituencies. The journal has as its main focus English teaching in L1 settings. Submissions focused on EFL will be considered only if they have clear pertinence to English literacy in L1 settings. It provides a place where authors from a range of backgrounds can identify matters of common concern and thereby foster broad professional communities and networks. Where possible, English Teaching: Practice and Critique encourages comparative approaches to topics and issues. The journal published three types of manuscripts: research articles, essays (theoretical papers, reviews, and responses), and teacher narratives. Often special issues of the journal focus on distinct topics; however, unthemed manuscript submissions are always welcome and published in most issues.
×
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