Concepts in T-fronted Classroom Discourse Adapted from INTERACTIONS DURING TEACHER-FRONTED CLASS TIME OF ENGLISH CLASSES IN A CHINESE UNIVERSITY By Xiaoyan Xie Xie, 2008
Interaction: Monologic or Dialogic?Monologic Dialogic T has pre- T modifies determined and expands script. on Ss‟ talk T and TB are Many voices dominant in the voices classroom Share examples in your transcripts of all four characteristics if possible…
The Default Instructional Pattern: T-Initiated Monologic IRF • Usually a T: QUESTION Initiating • T knows answer • Usually short S: Response & simple • Comp. check • USUALLY T: Follow- EVALUATIVEShare your IR up • Closes(evaluative) F exchangesequences…
F: Evaluative or Communicative? IRF:• IRF is Everywhere (West, China, etc)• “F” is key: • E For highlighting S errors (L2 & Content) • C For scaffolding towards independent S functioning • But Ts mostly use F to close, not open the floor to Ss (“Good!”, “Correct!”, “Perfect!”…)
Monologic IRF: Educationalvalue? Facilitates T‟s Hard for Ss to startcontrol more than or challenge ss‟ learning discourse Changes Ss‟ T controls From discovery to Ss learn how to direction, turn &ways of knowing transmission NOT think form of discourse Harder to China and the Used with „slower‟recall/understand socioeconomic groups, they get gap info (than in slower gap widens/perception discussion) widens of English ↓
Monologic IRF: Conclusion • lead Ss easily Enables T • Evaluate Ss‟ to utterances • Maintain order • Initiative • Independent thinking Reduces Ss‟ • Development of conversational skills • Proficiency growth • Has its place…but Monologic • Should NOT be the IRF norm for language classroomsShare your monologic IRFs
Dialogic IRF: it‟s all in the „F‟ justifications anything connections goes „F‟ is Context- dependent counter- clarification arguments elaborationShare your dialogic F-moves
Feedback on Content or MeaningWalsh 2003: ECHO•T‟s echo: unreal conversation reformulation•Disturbs flow of ss utterance • Engages ss•Makes excessive t-talk Paraphrase (more •Obstructs Ss learning elaboration appropriate • Sustains model) opportunities interaction Non- F-Move strategies evaluative • Builds on ssUse echo/revoicing verycarefully response contributions Back- channelling comment • Signals T‟s genuine Repetition interest
Dialogic IRF: Why?Dialogic Monologic Extends T S Closes T Ss Interaction Interaction Ss construct meaning Meaning already with T known Higher-level cognitive Lower-level L2 use cognitive use of L2 Ss develop proficiency Ss don‟t learn to by creating with L2 create with L2
I&R: Initiate & Respond = Turn-takingHow T and Ss take, hold,and give the floor • By name Call on Ss Invite S to • e.g. Ss raise handa reply Eliciting in Chinese classroomShare the eliciting s S • Very popular, but…examples/strategies you volunteers • Only dominant Ss volunteeruse in your transcript. • 2nd -most popular (40 %) T self- • Makes eliciting irrelevant answers • Ss learn to depend on T •No language learning
T-initiated IRF: What‟s theSolution? T CONTROLS More T ALLOWS LESS: opportunities MORE: content and for student variation to participation classroom IRF in learning interaction
Variation to IRF: 3 typesRecitation Responsive Responsive- Collaborativdiscourse discourse e Discourse Abandons T- Monologic More relaxed IRF initiated IRF Ss control much of Ss listen / not Open-ended Qs classroom active discourse T asks Qs that T expands F have no known answersResD and RCD: moreopps. for Ss to use L2, Tlonger & more complex accepts/integrates Ss self-select, initiate, etc. all S responsesutterancesLook for ResD and RCD Lots of S-S interactionin your transcripts
Student-Initiated Interaction When Ss initiate academic and procedural Qs or They construct knowledge Volunteer „„F” to T‟s “R” to their “I” Ss‟ cognition, content knowledge, and S discourse strategies Engaged are present Most ss must be Exert power taught to do this. through discourse moves
Question Types: Engaging Ss Teachers‟ Qs can Elicit Ss‟ responses Engage & motivate Ss Activate Ss‟ schema Impact students‟ learning variously Sometimes require modification Allow ss to co-construct knowledge (converse) with T
Question types Open Closed Longer answer Very brief answerDisplaycommonly knownanswerReferentialpersonal answer Share the T questions in your transcript. Which type(s) dominate?
Question Types: Global GeneralizedClassroom Research Findings How common are display questions in daily life? Displa y How much meaning construction practice do students get with display questions? Referential How common are display questions in your transcripts?
Q Modification and wait-timeMIC Techniques: Rapid Wait-time Q/no 3 Repeat Wait-time Short seconds Increased participation Rephrase/Chunk Visuals (gestures, Incomplete Ss initiate objects, pictures) More complex thoughtless language and Examples & Cues logic Quiet Ss more Share examples of wait-time or no active wait-time after your questions: Increased what kind of responses do you quality and quantity of s see? L2 use
Questioning strategy Must consider Contextual solution student‟s Attitude Motivation Hong Kong – Confucian culture T‟s intent Expand the F- move : “showing Same restricted off” is not valued responses: Why? e.g., ask Lose face Referential Qs = 1- Display Qs = 1- or follow-up – longer or 2-word reply 2-word reply questions utterances risk errors
Research: THE BEST proficiency developing Qs… … are tools for constructing … are scaffolding meaning with others – In this context, doing tasks They help Ss achieve otherwise unachievable Within classrooms utterances. In coursesShare any scaffolding or For shared goalsmeaning-construction (known reasons)Qs in your transcripts.What‟s the percentage?
“Non-Question Moves” Statements: suggesting, guessing Pausing, listening Pictures/visuals/realia Wondering aloud (conversational) – ss want to help T
The Importance of Context • Evaluate Ss‟ recall E.g., Intent of Display Q • Control ss interpetation Classroom context • Low quality response Korean Ss perceive „test‟ • Hamper ss‟ thinking Effectiveness of T‟s • T shows sincerity & questioning personal interest in Ss‟ E.g., Intent of Display Q responses Ss‟ interp. of T‟s T‟s intent intent • Higher cognitive processingShare evidence of “showing Korean Ss perceive „T • More complex responsepersonal interest” in ss cares‟responses in your transcripts. Isit easy for ss to perceive yourinterest?
Feedback on L2 Accuracy The The Some Asian uni good Can prevent L1 bad ss don‟t want any more EC rule transfer • Want communicative practice Allows learners to modify or confirm Very few effective interlanguage techniques rules Helps Ss noticeFind examples of the gap between TL and theircorrective utterancefeedback(linguistic) in yourtranscript.
EC: Accuracy - Some results • T gives correct version Explicit • Ss can’t reformulate, self-correct, or negotiate form • Most common – eventually ss may notice/produce correct form Recasts • Other ss may also benefit from T‟s recast to one S Elicitation • Ss self- or peer- correct -- negotiate form Metalinguistic • T: “You need past tense” S: negotiate formClarification request • negotiate form Repetition
E.C. Sociocultural Perspective EC within S‟s Should be knowledge frame negotiated Ss must self- or (ZPD) is most (led/scaffolded by peer- correct effective T, but done by S)Correct „errors‟, not (self- „attempts‟. reliance, autonomy) Share evidence of leading Ss to self- or peer- correct in your transcripts.
The Quality of Classroom LifeIf the goal is proficiency development, classroom interaction is onlyuseful if it helps Ss improve proficiency.Classroom discourse must be optimized to enhance the quality ofclassroom life of a particular T and Ss.In other words, all CI and CD depend on a unique context. So theright way to teach is to become adept at planning CI and CDpractices, and then making crucial decisions about changes inpractices on the fly.
Classroom Life isSituated Discourse Institutional goals/Constraints Participant goals/constraints TASK of the exchange Relative positions of participants
Affective Dimension Number • S involvementand kind • Mutual respect • Individually personalized of Ss‟ questionsdiscourse • Ss feel like individuals • Affirmation of ss responses (real depend listening/consideration) on an • Use ss response in next teaching moments ethos of
Mother Tongue Use As much asAs little as necessary necessary (Ss (when there is should not feel another way, use it) discouraged in class)
T Identity Discourse style T is sole legitimate knowledge provider A T who knowingly creates monologic classroom discourse believes Ss cannot self-acquire knowledge A T‟s beliefs about teaching dictate his/her classroom discourse style Meaning is interactively constructed A T who knowingly creates dialogicBased on your classroom discourse believestranscripts, where is Authority for learning isyour classroom shared (distributed)discourse style alongthe monologic Dialogic continuum?
T-identity in Asian (Chinese) contexts Transmission mode (T talks, ss listen) Emphasize language points - test No actual L2 use Teach as they were taught (little professional development) L2 use is unimportant L2 linguistic knowledge is important - test
S- Identity in Asian (Chinese) contexts • Traditional values: • Reticent • Face • collective > individual (“1 • Reluctant should not bother • Unvolunteering others”) • modesty (no showing • Uninitiating off/going first) • Unanswering • respect of elders/seniors (noCharacteristics • Brief replying challenge/address, eye • Respect T and Causes contact) • Learned school practice textbook • T‟s Discourse style • Limiting range of low- level Qs • Minimal wait-time Share moments where ss‟ interaction is unimpressive. What do you think are the causes? How can you fix these moments?