Investigating Classroom Talk

Edwards, Alistair D. N.; Westgate, David

doi:10.4324/9780203975718

Cited by 133 publications

(104 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This model is in distinct opposition to the widely held pedagogic position, very often translated into teaching practice, which favours more guidance and fewer opportunities for initiative on the part of the learner as the school subjects become more academic and content-specialised (Cazden, 1988;Edwards & Westgate, 1987;Rodrigues & Bell, 1995).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Towards a Framework of Socio-Linguistic Analysis of Science Textbooks: The Greek Case

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims at presenting a grid for analysing the way the language employed in Greek school science textbooks tends to project pedagogic messages. These messages are analysed for the different school science subjects (i.e., Physics, Chemistry, Biology) and educational levels (i.e., primary and lower secondary level). The analysis is made using the dimensions of content specialisation (classification) and social-pedagogic relationships (framing) promoted by the language of the school science textbooks as well as the elaboration and abstraction of the corresponding linguistic code (formality), thus combining pedagogical and socio-linguistic perspectives. Classification and formality are used to identify the ways science textbooks tend to position students in relation to the interior of the corresponding specialised body of knowledge (i.e., in terms of content and code) while framing is used to identify the ways science textbooks tend to position students as learning subjects within the school science discourse. The results show that the kind of pedagogic messages projected by the textbooks depends mainly on the educational level and not particularly on the specific discipline. As the educational level rises a gradual move towards more specialised forms of scientific knowledge (mainly in terms of code) with a parallel increase in the students' autonomy in accessing the textbook material is noticed. The implications concern the way both students and teachers approach science textbooks as well as the roles they can undertake by internalising the textbooks' pedagogic messages and also the way science textbooks are authored.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Towards a Framework of Socio-Linguistic Analysis of Science Textbooks: The Greek Case

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This indicates that giving explanations may be an inherent feature of tutors' performance. Explanations are also the core of teachers' lectures in the classroom (e.g., Cazden 1988;Edwards and Westgate 1987;Leinhardt 1993;Sánchez et al 1999;Sánchez et al 2008). Computer-based learning environments (CBLE's) involve, among other kinds of assistance, systems which provide intelligent answers and feedback on learners' contributions (e.g., Graesser et al 2001;VanLehn et al (2000), default explanations in response to learners' requests (e.g., Aleven and Koedinger 2000;Renkl 2002), or default explanations given as a feedback on learners' choices (e.g., Mayer 2002, 2005;Moreno et al 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Are instructional explanations more effective in the context of an impasse?

Sánchez

García-Rodicio

Acuña³

2008

Instr Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effective instructional explanations help the students to construct coherent mental representations. To do so, one condition is that they must be tailored to students' needs. It is hypothesized that explanations are more helpful if they also explicitly aid the students to detect problems in their mental representations, as this provokes an impasse that motivates students to process the explanation deeply. Participants were provided with a computer-based material on plate tectonics and then with explanatory support in the form of either a tailored explanation preceded by an impasse-trigger (I ? E group) or an identical explanation without the impasse-trigger (noI ? E group). After the reading of the materials they solved retention and transfer tests; their flawed ideas were also counted. Participants in the I ? E group recalled more correct information, generated more transfer solutions, and showed fewer flawed ideas than those in the noI ? E group. This indicates that tailored explanations combined with impasse-triggers that make explicit conflicts between the text model and the students 0 models can indeed foster deep learning.Keywords Instructional explanations Á Self-explanations Á Mental model repair Á Students' mental models Á Impasses Á Impasse-triggersOne key question in the promotion of deep learning is under what conditions instructional explanations work effectively. Identifying the factors that make instructional explanations successful is relevant to the extent that these explanations are prevalent (in normal tutoring, classroom lectures, instructional materials) and pose potential advantages (they are complete and coherent and they can help learners when they are stuck). However, evidence from tutoring sessions suggests that tutorial explanations are not associated with learning, whereas explanations generated by the students (i.e., self-explanations) have consistently

show abstract

“…Research into classroom discourse has revealed many taken-for-granted features of talk in this context and demonstrated the constricting effect that teacher-led recitation can have on the opportunities for students to participate actively in the learning process (A. D. Edwards & Westgate, 1994;D. Edwards & Mercer, 1987).…”

Section: Claiming Our Own Space: Polyphonic Dialoguementioning

confidence: 97%

“…A well-established tradition of research and theory attests to the important role played by talk in promoting learning among school students in classroom lessons (Cazden, 2001;A. D. Edwards & Westgate, 1994;Mehan, 1979).…”

Section: Talk and Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%