The situated nature of dialogic interactions: Children's talk across different tasks

IF 2 3区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Learning Culture and Social Interaction Pub Date : 2023-08-01 DOI:10.1016/j.lcsi.2023.100728
Sylvia Rojas-Drummond, Ana Luisa Rubio-Jimenez, Flora Hernández-Carrillo
{"title":"The situated nature of dialogic interactions: Children's talk across different tasks","authors":"Sylvia Rojas-Drummond,&nbsp;Ana Luisa Rubio-Jimenez,&nbsp;Flora Hernández-Carrillo","doi":"10.1016/j.lcsi.2023.100728","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper analysed the situated nature of dialogic interactions by comparing primary-school children's communicative patterns when solving two divergent literacy tasks versus a convergent logical-reasoning task. Peer interactions were analysed using a compact version of the CAM-UNAM Scheme for Educational Dialogue Analysis (SEDA), which qualifies dialogic interactions. Compact-SEDA allowed systematic, fine-grained analyses of children's conversations when addressing each task. We related children's communicative patterns to dialogic interaction styles previously identified as productive for learning, namely ‘co-constructive’ and ‘exploratory’. Results showed that children subtly adapted their discussions to the knowledge domain and nature of the task. For the divergent tasks, children created meaning jointly by elaborating, chaining, and gradually transforming their own and each other's ideas, negotiating perspectives and seeking agreements. This pattern reflects a ‘co-constructive’ interaction style. In contrast, for the convergent task, children reasoned together, positioned themselves in the dialogue by agreeing or disagreeing with each other's ideas, and supported their positions by making their reasoning explicit through arguments and counter-arguments. This pattern reflects an ‘exploratory’ interaction style. Results confirm and expand findings from previous studies on peer communication patterns associated with the nature of the task, using more comprehensive, refined and objective analytical tools than previously employed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46850,"journal":{"name":"Learning Culture and Social Interaction","volume":"41 ","pages":"Article 100728"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Culture and Social Interaction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210656123000442","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper analysed the situated nature of dialogic interactions by comparing primary-school children's communicative patterns when solving two divergent literacy tasks versus a convergent logical-reasoning task. Peer interactions were analysed using a compact version of the CAM-UNAM Scheme for Educational Dialogue Analysis (SEDA), which qualifies dialogic interactions. Compact-SEDA allowed systematic, fine-grained analyses of children's conversations when addressing each task. We related children's communicative patterns to dialogic interaction styles previously identified as productive for learning, namely ‘co-constructive’ and ‘exploratory’. Results showed that children subtly adapted their discussions to the knowledge domain and nature of the task. For the divergent tasks, children created meaning jointly by elaborating, chaining, and gradually transforming their own and each other's ideas, negotiating perspectives and seeking agreements. This pattern reflects a ‘co-constructive’ interaction style. In contrast, for the convergent task, children reasoned together, positioned themselves in the dialogue by agreeing or disagreeing with each other's ideas, and supported their positions by making their reasoning explicit through arguments and counter-arguments. This pattern reflects an ‘exploratory’ interaction style. Results confirm and expand findings from previous studies on peer communication patterns associated with the nature of the task, using more comprehensive, refined and objective analytical tools than previously employed.

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
对话互动的情境性:儿童在不同任务中的对话
本文通过比较小学生在解决两个不同的识字任务和一个趋同的逻辑推理任务时的交际模式,分析了对话互动的情境性。使用CAM-UNAM教育对话分析计划(SEDA)的紧凑版对同伴互动进行了分析,该计划对对话互动进行了限定。Compact SEDA允许在处理每项任务时对儿童的对话进行系统、精细的分析。我们将儿童的交际模式与对话互动风格联系起来,这种互动风格以前被认为是有助于学习的,即“共同建设性”和“探索性”。结果表明,孩子们巧妙地将他们的讨论适应了任务的知识领域和性质。对于不同的任务,孩子们通过阐述、链接和逐渐转变自己和彼此的想法,协商观点和寻求协议,共同创造意义。这种模式反映了一种“共同建设性”的互动风格。相反,在趋同任务中,孩子们一起推理,通过同意或不同意对方的想法来在对话中定位自己,并通过争论和反驳来明确自己的推理来支持自己的立场。这种模式反映了一种“探索性”互动风格。研究结果证实并扩展了以前关于与任务性质相关的同伴交流模式的研究结果,使用了比以前更全面、更精细、更客观的分析工具。
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
相关文献
Offener Brief an Herrn Prof. Dr. Czerny
IF 0.6 4区 医学Deutsche Medizinische WochenschriftPub Date : 1894-04-01 DOI: 10.1055/S-0029-1205746
A. Hartmann
来源期刊
Learning Culture and Social Interaction
Learning Culture and Social Interaction EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
10.50%
发文量
50
期刊最新文献
Investigating upper-secondary school learners' contributions in co-regulation and socially shared regulation during collaborative learning A dynamic systems examination of the impact of peers on educator–infant synchrony within joint attention interactions in an early childhood room Authority and positionings in elementary mathematics: An interactional ethnographic approach Peer interactions in 4/6-month-old infants: From motor development to multimodal communication Egalitarian dialogue and student participation in Learning Communities. The case of the Coquimbo Region, Chile
×
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