Joint Initiation and Joint Feedback: Connecting Collaboration with Pedagogy in Co-teaching

Abstract

How teachers ask questions and give feedback to student responses is an age-old topic that pervades educational research, especially empirical work that examines classroom interaction. Focusing on the understudied context of co-teaching, and a virtually unexamined dynamic with two teachers with equal roles and skills sets, this study looks at how co-teachers can jointly accomplish the initiation and feedback work in IRF sequences. Two collaborative practices, joint initiation and joint feedback, are identified and described in context. The discovery of these practices reveals that co-teachers with equal roles can jointly occupy not only the same IRF sequence, but also the same component of the sequence. Beyond uncovering some interactional characteristics of this type of collaborative interaction, the findings of this study also carry important implications for pedagogy. First, the instances of joint initiation show how co-teacher collaboration can enhance the progressivity and the pedagogical effectiveness of question-answer exchange during instruction. Second, the practice of joint feedback reflects some of the distinct advantages of having two instructors in one classroom, which include making feedback more salient for learners, creating more opportunities for one-on-one teacher-student interaction, and increasing the likelihood of spotting and addressing problems in student understanding.

Synchronizing and amending: A conversation analytic account of the “Co-ness” in co-teaching

“…Second, it focuses on the generally neglected topic of co-teaching for gifted students and, to my knowledge, provides the first CA study of this context. Third, it extends upon what only a few studies (see e.g., King, 2016King, , 2018Wang, 2019 ;Wassell, 2005 ) have done by looking at a teacher pair with equal roles. This is significant because how participants orient to the specific context and their roles within it is procedurally consequential in institutional settings ( Drew & Sorjonen, 2011 ;Schegloff, 1992 ).…”

“…As the extract begins, note that the co-teachers provide joint feedback ( King, 2018 ) over lines 03-05 to Alison's contribution (lines 01-02), with Ms. B accepting the response as satisfactory by typing her words ( Margutti & Drew, 2014 ) into the table (see Figure 5 ), and Mr. R producing a gasp and a surprise token ( Wilkinson & 3 Ms. B typed the name as 'Grey,' but it is actually spelled 'Gray.' Kitzinger, 2006 ) that treats the child's remark as noteworthy and exciting.…”

“…The interdisciplinary research on co-teaching has been largely top-down in nature, utilizing self-reporting methods such as surveys or interviews to generate descriptions of effective practices ( Friend et al, 2015 ); however, a small body of work employing methods that fall under the umbrella of discourse analysis uses a more bottom-up approach to understanding teacher collaboration. Whether it be through the lens of positioning theory (see e.g., Martin-Jones & Saxena, 1996 ), systemic functional linguistics (see e.g., Gardner, 2006 ;Luo, 2013 ), critical discourse analysis (see e.g., Ashton, 2010Ashton, , 2014Ashton, , 2016Creese, 2002 ), conversation analysis (CA) (see e.g., Butterfield & Bhatta, 2015 ;King, 2016, King, 2018Lee, 2016 ;Park, 2014 ), or a loosely defined analysis of classroom discourse (see e.g., Roth et al, 2005 ), these studies provide a detailed analysis of co-teaching by using recordings of naturally-occurring data to capture and shed light on the nuances of actual classroom interaction. In addition to inclusion and teacher training settings, these studies often examine English as a Foreign or Second Language (EFL or ESL) classrooms where teachers with different language backgrounds are paired to enhance the linguistic and cultural repertoire in the classroom ( Barratt & Kontra, 20 0 0 ;Carless & Walker, 2006 ).…”

“…This growing body of research illuminates some interactional practices that may be linked to the larger objectives of implementing co-teaching in the abovementioned contexts. For example, several studies (see e.g., Aline & Hosada, 2006 ;Butterfield & Bhatta, 2015 ;King, 2018 ;Lee, 2016 ;Wang, 2019 ) examine how the well-known Initiation-Response-Feedback (IRF) sequence (see e.g., Cazden, 2001 ;Mehan, 1979a ) unfolds in co-taught contexts. The findings suggest that the presence of a second teacher creates unique learning affordances such as the possibility for one co-teacher to participate as a "mock student" in the second turn of the sequence, enabling them to provide an answer to the other teacher's initiation in a way that models a proper response or, in an EFL context, demonstrates to learners how turn-taking works in English (see e.g., Aline & Hosada, 2006 ;Lee, 2016 ).…”

“…The findings suggest that the presence of a second teacher creates unique learning affordances such as the possibility for one co-teacher to participate as a "mock student" in the second turn of the sequence, enabling them to provide an answer to the other teacher's initiation in a way that models a proper response or, in an EFL context, demonstrates to learners how turn-taking works in English (see e.g., Aline & Hosada, 2006 ;Lee, 2016 ). Additionally, participation of both teachers in the third turn of an IRF sequence can help co-manage multiple student contributions and give more robust and individualized feedback to the learners ( King, 2018 ).…”