Repetitions as a participation practice in children’s argumentative peer interactions

IF 2.7 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL European Journal of Psychology of Education Pub Date : 2024-07-04 DOI:10.1007/s10212-024-00873-y
Birte Arendt, Sara Zadunaisky Ehrlich
{"title":"Repetitions as a participation practice in children’s argumentative peer interactions","authors":"Birte Arendt, Sara Zadunaisky Ehrlich","doi":"10.1007/s10212-024-00873-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Both participation and argumentation (OECD, 2022) are important keywords in educational contexts. While participation is seen as a crucial prerequisite for education and collaborative learning in general, argumentation as a discursive practice serves to convey and negotiate—also school-specific—knowledge. This paper explores repetition in argumentative events as a technique of establishing—or even hindering—participation in terms of alignment and affiliation. It can serve as a strategy for participation by signalling responsiveness and thematic coherence—and thus inclusion. At the same time, however, studies show that repetition can also signal contradiction and rejection—and thus exclusion. So far, we know little about how exactly these functional differences are produced—especially in younger children. Therefore, the paper explores how children use repetition as a resource for negotiating participation in argumentative events. Using authentic data in the form of observations and transcriptions of audio and video recordings from child-child-interactions of 15 Hebrew- and 31 German-speaking children aged 3–6 years, we identify oral argumentative events and investigate different forms of repetitions and their respective relevance for enabling participation. Our results show that, on the one hand, minimal and partial repetitions are used by the children in an inclusive way, creating closeness between the participants. On the other hand, children use complete repetitions more as an excluding technique, displaying misalignment and disaffiliation, in order to challenge and mock each other. The findings suggest that this line of research has significant potential to provide new insights into the formation of social relationships between peers, into the prevention or establishment of participation, which itself is a prerequisite for joint learning, as well as insights into the acquisition of argumentative competence.</p>","PeriodicalId":47800,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychology of Education","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychology of Education","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-024-00873-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Both participation and argumentation (OECD, 2022) are important keywords in educational contexts. While participation is seen as a crucial prerequisite for education and collaborative learning in general, argumentation as a discursive practice serves to convey and negotiate—also school-specific—knowledge. This paper explores repetition in argumentative events as a technique of establishing—or even hindering—participation in terms of alignment and affiliation. It can serve as a strategy for participation by signalling responsiveness and thematic coherence—and thus inclusion. At the same time, however, studies show that repetition can also signal contradiction and rejection—and thus exclusion. So far, we know little about how exactly these functional differences are produced—especially in younger children. Therefore, the paper explores how children use repetition as a resource for negotiating participation in argumentative events. Using authentic data in the form of observations and transcriptions of audio and video recordings from child-child-interactions of 15 Hebrew- and 31 German-speaking children aged 3–6 years, we identify oral argumentative events and investigate different forms of repetitions and their respective relevance for enabling participation. Our results show that, on the one hand, minimal and partial repetitions are used by the children in an inclusive way, creating closeness between the participants. On the other hand, children use complete repetitions more as an excluding technique, displaying misalignment and disaffiliation, in order to challenge and mock each other. The findings suggest that this line of research has significant potential to provide new insights into the formation of social relationships between peers, into the prevention or establishment of participation, which itself is a prerequisite for joint learning, as well as insights into the acquisition of argumentative competence.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重复是儿童同伴间争论性互动的一种参与方式
参与和论证(经合组织,2022 年)都是教育环境中的重要关键词。参与被视为教育和协作学习的重要先决条件,而争论作为一种话语实践,则有助于传递和协商--也是学校特有的--知识。本文探讨了论辩活动中的重复作为一种建立--甚至阻碍--参与一致性和从属性的技巧。重复可以作为一种参与策略,它意味着回应和主题的一致性,因此也意味着包容性。但与此同时,研究表明,重复也可能意味着矛盾和排斥,从而被排除在外。迄今为止,我们对这些功能差异究竟是如何产生的知之甚少--尤其是在年龄较小的儿童身上。因此,本文探讨了儿童如何利用重复作为协商参与争论事件的资源。通过观察和转录 15 名希伯来语儿童和 31 名德语儿童(3-6 岁)与儿童互动的音频和视频记录,我们使用了真实的数据,确定了口头争论事件,并研究了不同形式的重复及其各自在促进参与方面的相关性。我们的研究结果表明,一方面,儿童以包容的方式使用最少的重复和部分重复,从而在参与者之间建立亲密关系。另一方面,儿童则更多地将完全重复作为一种排斥技巧,表现出错位和不协调,以挑战和嘲弄对方。研究结果表明,这一研究方向具有巨大的潜力,可以为同伴之间社会关系的形成、参与的预防或建立(参与本身就是共同学习的前提条件)以及辩论能力的获得提供新的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
3.30%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Psychology of Education (EJPE) is a quarterly journal oriented toward publishing high-quality papers that address the relevant psychological aspects of educational processes embedded in different institutional, social, and cultural contexts, and which focus on diversity in terms of the participants, their educational trajectories and their socio-cultural contexts. Authors are strongly encouraged to employ a variety of theoretical and methodological tools developed in the psychology of education in order to gain new insights by integrating different perspectives. Instead of reinforcing the divisions and distances between different communities stemming from their theoretical and methodological backgrounds, we would like to invite authors to engage with diverse theoretical and methodological tools in a meaningful way and to search for the new knowledge that can emerge from a combination of these tools. EJPE is open to all papers reflecting findings from original psychological studies on educational processes, as well as to exceptional theoretical and review papers that integrate current knowledge and chart new avenues for future research. Following the assumption that engaging with diversities creates great opportunities for new knowledge, the editorial team wishes to encourage, in particular, authors from less represented countries and regions, as well as young researchers, to submit their work and to keep going through the review process, which can be challenging, but which also presents opportunities for learning and inspiration.
期刊最新文献
Giving voice to educators: Primary school teachers explain how they promote values to their pupils Developing gestures in the infant classroom: from showing and giving to pointing The authenticity dilemma: towards a theory on the conditions and effects of authentic learning Peers and value preferences among adolescents in school classes: a social network and longitudinal approach The ups and downs of online intergroup contact interventions: popular narratives and secondary transfer effect
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1