Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Final Critic Project
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Final Critic Project

352

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
352
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Final critic project Teacher-Student Interaction: Cross- Gender Study -- 9659507 Vicky--
  • 2. Duffy, J., Warren, K., & Walsh, M. (2001). Class room interactions: Gender of Teacher, Gender of Student, and Classroom Subject. Sex Roles, 45 . Journal articles(1) Introduction Elementary and junior high school teachers interact more with male students Class subject Gender of teacher Gender of student Type of interaction Method INTERSECT observational instrument
  • 3.
    • Result
    Interaction with male students 1.Female teachers > Male teachers 2. Female mathematics teachers, male and female literature/language teachers > male mathematic teachers Types of interactions Female students: more remediation Male students: more criticism Intellectual/Conduct Appearance/Other Praise/Acceptance Remediation/Criticism
  • 4.
    • Males did receive more interactions, especially
    • acceptance-intellectual, criticism-intellectual
    • and criticism-conduct interactions
    • Content of interactions
    • Intellectual interactions :
    • Mathematics classes > Literature classes
    • Conduct interactions :
    • Literature classes > Mathematics classes
  • 5.
    • Student initiators of interactions
    • * There were no gender differences among students in the rates of responding to questions asked by teachers to the class as a whole
    x Male students did initiate more interactions Lit/Lg x x Math Male teacher Female teacher
  • 6. Journal articles(2)
    • Lee, J. (2002). Gender effect on error treatment in university ESL classrooms Electronic Magazine of Multicultural Education, 4 (2).
    • Hypothesis
    • 1.Female students will receive less error treatments than male students
    • 2.The errors female students make will be treated in a less explicit manners than male students
    • Methods
    • Classroom observation/survey of students/
    • interview of instructors
  • 7.
    • Results
    • Students
    • Both male and female students preferred explicit error treatment by explanation to recast and repetition
    • Female participants agree more with explicit oral error treatments and metalinguistic error treatment to recast and repetition than male counterparts
    • Both male and female students preferred in-class error treatment
    • Teachers
    • Error treatment was given to male students twice as much as to female students
    • Male student : more explicit treatments
    • Female students: more clarification requests
  • 8. Journal articles(3)
    • Wolfe, P. (1998). Best Supporting Actress:
    • Gender and Language Across Four
    • Secondary ESL/Bilingual classrooms. Current
    • Issues in Education, 1 (3).
    • Introduction
    • Specific program types
    • Classroom organizations
    • Gender roles
    the amount and type of classroom lg to which students have access What kind of classroom discourse structure are built from and enact a more equitable approach to classroom lg production?
  • 9.
    • Method
    • Classrooms
    • Traditional ESL/Bilingual content (world history )
    • Sheltered content (biology)/Holistic ESL
    • Field notes/ Audio tape
    • Results
    • Boys and girl in these secondary ESL classrooms were
    • granted differential access to the amount and type of lg they
    • were allowed to produce based on
    • 1st :Theoretical orientation of the teacher
    • 2nd:other factors  academic content, the teacher’s use if student’s first lg…
  • 10.
    • Discussion
    • The type of program has little effect on increasing access for either girls or boys .
    • Girls suffer from more restrictions in the amount of access to classroom discourse than boys
    • Traditional notion of teaching and learning restricted student roles
    • The holistic classroom offered significantly different roles to both boy and girls
  • 11.
    • Class interaction
    Reflections Teacher Student Individual difference Gender Belief Social context
  • 12.
    • (1)
    • “ It becomes important to try to discern whether
    • teachers’ interaction patterns are primary the result
    • of their own mental schemes , or whether the interaction
    • patterns mainly result from differences
    • in male students’ versus female students’ behavior.”
    • “ Elementary and junior high school teachers often developed themes and examples which interest males.”
    • (2)
    • “ Instructor interviews revealed that those who were
    • interviewed mentioned that they did not treat
    • students’ errors differently depending on students’
    • gender but considered students’ age and their native
    • culture.”
  • 13.
    • (3)
    • “ They (boys) don’t want to do anything, they
    • want to talk, they want to be the center of
    • attention of the class, that’s what they
    • do…the girls do the work and then they (the
    • boys) act like they did something when they
    • really did not. ”
    • “ The girls do better in everything, girls finish faster than the boys in everything except in Science, I guess that’s where the boys get ahead of the girls”
  • 14.  
  • 15.
    • ~Thanks for your attention ~

×