Where Does Research on Classroom Discourse and Interaction Go From Here?

Task type completion in lower level EFL classes: A conversation analytic study

“…Further studies using a TBL framework may compare the findings with regular English classes for EFL students with mixed level of proficiency. Nonetheless, despite the shortcomings, the study contributes to and continues work on empirically grounded theories of second language talk and learning (Cazden, 2001;Kasper & Kim, 2015;Markee, 2015;Wong & Waring, 2020). For example, despite prior studies that suggested TBL as unsuitable for beginner students (Deng & Carless, 2009), the current study demonstrated that these students were able to complete the tasks in a competent manner through peer-interaction which suggests that TBL have a positive role to play in L2 learning.…”

“…Studies on L2 classroom discourse have widely examined the learning that occurs in group or pair interactions (Bailey & Nunan, 1996;Eksildsen & Wagner, 2015;Hall & Verplaetse, 2000;Hellerman et al, 2019;Hellerman & Pekarek Doehler, 2010;Markee, 2015;Mori, 2004;Ohta, 2001;van Lier, 1988). In many of these studies, tasks are viewed as important foundations for classroom teaching, social interaction, and language development (Ohta, 2001;Ro, 2018;Seedhouse, 2004).…”

“…The study employed conversation analysis (CA) as the primary methodology for analysing talk sequences. In addition to the examination of ordinary talk, CA has been used to analyse institutional talk (Drew & Heritage, 1992), such as classroom interactions (Gardner, 2015;Hall & Looney, 2019;Hellerman & Pekarek Doehler, 2010;Markee, 2015;Mori, 2004;Park, 2013;Ro, 2018;Seedhouse, 1999Seedhouse, , 2011. Heritage (2004) referred to the second form of CA as 'institutional CA', which uses CA to understand talk in the legal, education, mass media, medical, and other social institutional contexts.…”

Revisiting the relationship between Ethnography, Discourse and Education

“…While we share her overall goal of engaging in the study of everyday life of people in particular social contexts, we draw on different theoretical, ontological and epistemological perspectives to guide us in examining the role and consequences of classroom discourse studies on teaching learning processes to develop theoretical understandings of how they inform work on teaching and learning processes in different educational contexts (Markee, 2015). Thus, by engaging in the processes of intertextual and theoretical reflexivity, we developed understandings of how our logic-of-inquiry was consistent with as well as differed from her argument that ethnography is a philosophy of research.…”

“…Additionally, by framing this distinction between anthropology of education and anthropology in education, as well as for education, Bloome et al (2018) provide insights into what the differing logics-of-inquiry guiding these different programs of research have provided that can inform studies of teaching and learning across levels of education in classrooms, schools and community settings. These different programs of research, when view contrastively, provide a broad set of core concepts that make visible shifts in understanding of the linguistic, cultural, social and academic challenges facing students and their teachers today across levels of schooling and community settings (McCarty, 2005;2014;Markee, 2015;Green & Bridges, 2018;Kelly, 2016a;Kelly & Green, 2019, among others) In this interview, we have proposed processes for engaging in theoretical and intertextual reflexivity (Heath & Street, 2008) as well as interpersonal reflexivity central to an ethnographic perspective. In this way, we sought to introduce to readers ways of stepping back from what we/they assume is known, in order to explore the range of traditions that have the potential for informing research on language and discourse in the fields of teaching and learning children and adults in schools and universities that is at the center of the questions posed to us by the editors.…”