Pub Date : 2020-12-04DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2020.1856698
Derya Duran
The book Researching Classroom Discourse: A Student Guide , by J. Jenks is a welcome addition to a growing body of studies that sheds light on the complex nature of classroom discourse (CD). The book in particular appeals to novice researchers writing theses/academic papers on CD, including step-by-step guidance for understanding the research process along with reflective questions and discourse examples. Comprising eight chapters, the book is grouped into three parts, (1) Planning, (2) Analysing, and (3) Understanding and Reporting. Such an approach is useful as the earlier chapters pave the way to the upcoming ones. Part I, which familiarises readers with the theoretical and empirical issues related to CD and discourse analysis, consists of two chapters. The first chapter provides a holistic approach to understanding CD, addressing the concepts of ‘classrooms’ and ‘discourse’ separately. In the ‘classrooms’ section, the distinction between setting and context as well as the discourse in traditional and nontraditional classrooms are given in light of exemplary studies. In the ‘discourse’ section, putting types of classroom discourse (i.e. discourse actions and orientations to discourse structures) in a figure, the author briefly explains them, supporting with additional readings and references to the upcoming chapters where those issues will be handled more comprehensively. As the book is mostly intended for CD researchers relying on discourse analytic approaches, the chapter continues with a basic explanation of discourse analysis, ‘the study of the relationship between language and the contexts in which it is used’ (McCarthy 1991, 5). The chapter concludes with a research outline, which points to the exact chapters that correlate to the issues raised in the figure, thereby highlighting the cohesion of the whole book. The second chapter scrutinises logistical issues in CD research, including the complexities and challenges of recording and transcribing classroom interaction data. First, practical considerations such as access to data, time, technology, ethics and empirical issues are handled. Then, collection, manage-ment and familiarisation of data are provided. The chapter ends by discussing different types and practices
{"title":"Researching classroom interaction: a student guide","authors":"Derya Duran","doi":"10.1080/19463014.2020.1856698","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2020.1856698","url":null,"abstract":"The book Researching Classroom Discourse: A Student Guide , by J. Jenks is a welcome addition to a growing body of studies that sheds light on the complex nature of classroom discourse (CD). The book in particular appeals to novice researchers writing theses/academic papers on CD, including step-by-step guidance for understanding the research process along with reflective questions and discourse examples. Comprising eight chapters, the book is grouped into three parts, (1) Planning, (2) Analysing, and (3) Understanding and Reporting. Such an approach is useful as the earlier chapters pave the way to the upcoming ones. Part I, which familiarises readers with the theoretical and empirical issues related to CD and discourse analysis, consists of two chapters. The first chapter provides a holistic approach to understanding CD, addressing the concepts of ‘classrooms’ and ‘discourse’ separately. In the ‘classrooms’ section, the distinction between setting and context as well as the discourse in traditional and nontraditional classrooms are given in light of exemplary studies. In the ‘discourse’ section, putting types of classroom discourse (i.e. discourse actions and orientations to discourse structures) in a figure, the author briefly explains them, supporting with additional readings and references to the upcoming chapters where those issues will be handled more comprehensively. As the book is mostly intended for CD researchers relying on discourse analytic approaches, the chapter continues with a basic explanation of discourse analysis, ‘the study of the relationship between language and the contexts in which it is used’ (McCarthy 1991, 5). The chapter concludes with a research outline, which points to the exact chapters that correlate to the issues raised in the figure, thereby highlighting the cohesion of the whole book. The second chapter scrutinises logistical issues in CD research, including the complexities and challenges of recording and transcribing classroom interaction data. First, practical considerations such as access to data, time, technology, ethics and empirical issues are handled. Then, collection, manage-ment and familiarisation of data are provided. The chapter ends by discussing different types and practices","PeriodicalId":45350,"journal":{"name":"Classroom Discourse","volume":"43 1","pages":"336 - 338"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81774936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-14DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2020.1814368
Anke Herder, J. Berenst, K. de Glopper, T. Koole
ABSTRACT This paper discusses how primary school students, who are writing together in the context of inquiry learning, explicitly orient to knowing of oneself and others within the peer group. Using Conversation Analysis, we disclose the conversational functions of assertions holding ‘I know’, ‘you know’ and ‘we know’. First, students position themselves as knowledgeable, to (i) express a preannouncement of a proposal, (ii) respond to a request for information and (iii) reinforce an assertion with use of an evidential. Second, students claim equal epistemic access, as a response to an action that conveys epistemic authority of a peer. Third, students indicate shared knowledge with other participants, to (i) pursue agreement, (ii) check the epistemic status of a co-participant, (iii) reject a proposal for grounds of relevance and (iv) mark shared, newfound knowledge. The different practices are discussed in terms of epistemics in conversation and dialogic writing.
{"title":"Conversational functions of ‘I know’, ‘you know’ and ‘we know’ in collaborative writing of primary school children","authors":"Anke Herder, J. Berenst, K. de Glopper, T. Koole","doi":"10.1080/19463014.2020.1814368","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2020.1814368","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper discusses how primary school students, who are writing together in the context of inquiry learning, explicitly orient to knowing of oneself and others within the peer group. Using Conversation Analysis, we disclose the conversational functions of assertions holding ‘I know’, ‘you know’ and ‘we know’. First, students position themselves as knowledgeable, to (i) express a preannouncement of a proposal, (ii) respond to a request for information and (iii) reinforce an assertion with use of an evidential. Second, students claim equal epistemic access, as a response to an action that conveys epistemic authority of a peer. Third, students indicate shared knowledge with other participants, to (i) pursue agreement, (ii) check the epistemic status of a co-participant, (iii) reject a proposal for grounds of relevance and (iv) mark shared, newfound knowledge. The different practices are discussed in terms of epistemics in conversation and dialogic writing.","PeriodicalId":45350,"journal":{"name":"Classroom Discourse","volume":"105 1","pages":"1 - 31"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85888565","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-08DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2020.1832899
S. Looney
Many of us recall being taught during our teacher training programmes that silence was something we would encounter in classrooms, particularly when working with East Asian students. It would be ou...
{"title":"East Asian perspectives on silence in English language education","authors":"S. Looney","doi":"10.1080/19463014.2020.1832899","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2020.1832899","url":null,"abstract":"Many of us recall being taught during our teacher training programmes that silence was something we would encounter in classrooms, particularly when working with East Asian students. It would be ou...","PeriodicalId":45350,"journal":{"name":"Classroom Discourse","volume":"324 1","pages":"106 - 109"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73411579","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2019.1633550
Sheng-Hsun Lee
ABSTRACT How do language instructors fulfill institutional mandates while also nurturing students’ interest? What becomes of this process when it unfolds not in one class meeting but in a series of pedagogical events? Classroom research has suggested the importance of integrating authentic, conversational, and rapport-building talk with instructional practices. What remains unknown but central to classroom practices is the temporal, institutional, and psychological underpinnings this integration entails. This ethnographic study explores the dialectical unfolding of paradigmatic and narrative thinking in a course of domestic U.S. students and international Korean students. Paradigmatic thought is concerned with truth, scientific logic and categorization, which are essential for explaining language features. Narrative thought ‘strives to put its timeless miracles into the particulars of experience, and to locate that experience in time and place.’ Drawing on classroom recordings, participant interviews, and instructional artifacts, the study shows that ordinary materials designated by the institution to underscore paradigmatic thinking were rendered extraordinary when the instructor and students collaboratively transformed them with interpersonally and interculturally meaningful stories across a chain of pedagogical encounters.
{"title":"The dialectical unfolding of paradigmatic and narrative thinking in a Chinese-as-a-foreign-language classroom","authors":"Sheng-Hsun Lee","doi":"10.1080/19463014.2019.1633550","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2019.1633550","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT How do language instructors fulfill institutional mandates while also nurturing students’ interest? What becomes of this process when it unfolds not in one class meeting but in a series of pedagogical events? Classroom research has suggested the importance of integrating authentic, conversational, and rapport-building talk with instructional practices. What remains unknown but central to classroom practices is the temporal, institutional, and psychological underpinnings this integration entails. This ethnographic study explores the dialectical unfolding of paradigmatic and narrative thinking in a course of domestic U.S. students and international Korean students. Paradigmatic thought is concerned with truth, scientific logic and categorization, which are essential for explaining language features. Narrative thought ‘strives to put its timeless miracles into the particulars of experience, and to locate that experience in time and place.’ Drawing on classroom recordings, participant interviews, and instructional artifacts, the study shows that ordinary materials designated by the institution to underscore paradigmatic thinking were rendered extraordinary when the instructor and students collaboratively transformed them with interpersonally and interculturally meaningful stories across a chain of pedagogical encounters.","PeriodicalId":45350,"journal":{"name":"Classroom Discourse","volume":"59 1","pages":"316 - 336"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82948962","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2019.1585890
Annerose Willemsen, Myrte N. Gosen, T. Koole, K. de Glopper
ABSTRACT This paper reports on a conversation analytic study into the pass-on turns that teachers produce to return the floor to the class following one student’s contribution, in the context of whole-class discussions around texts in 4th grade history and geography lessons. These pass-on turns are remarkable, as the teachers take the turn in order to convey that they will not be responding, but are instead giving their students the opportunity to do so. Our bottom-up analyses allowed us to identify different practices and their projections, and revealed their effects on the ensuing responses. Whereas minimal pass-on practices do not alter the sequential implications of the preceding student turn and typically lead to responses to the student turn, more elaborate practices do slightly alter the sequential implications and mostly lead to responses to the pass-on turn itself, or to an earlier turn produced by the teacher. The analyses show that, although the pass-on turns seem to sustain the Teacher-Student-Teacher-Student participation pattern, this does not hinder the activity of having a whole-class discussion in which students discuss the topic at hand and critically consider and challenge the contributions of their classmates.
{"title":"Teachers’ pass-on practices in whole-class discussions: how teachers return the floor to their students","authors":"Annerose Willemsen, Myrte N. Gosen, T. Koole, K. de Glopper","doi":"10.1080/19463014.2019.1585890","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2019.1585890","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper reports on a conversation analytic study into the pass-on turns that teachers produce to return the floor to the class following one student’s contribution, in the context of whole-class discussions around texts in 4th grade history and geography lessons. These pass-on turns are remarkable, as the teachers take the turn in order to convey that they will not be responding, but are instead giving their students the opportunity to do so. Our bottom-up analyses allowed us to identify different practices and their projections, and revealed their effects on the ensuing responses. Whereas minimal pass-on practices do not alter the sequential implications of the preceding student turn and typically lead to responses to the student turn, more elaborate practices do slightly alter the sequential implications and mostly lead to responses to the pass-on turn itself, or to an earlier turn produced by the teacher. The analyses show that, although the pass-on turns seem to sustain the Teacher-Student-Teacher-Student participation pattern, this does not hinder the activity of having a whole-class discussion in which students discuss the topic at hand and critically consider and challenge the contributions of their classmates.","PeriodicalId":45350,"journal":{"name":"Classroom Discourse","volume":"63 1","pages":"297 - 315"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86027307","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2019.1651750
M. Stephenson
ABSTRACT The use of group-based, task-oriented, peer interaction formats in classroom and public L2 speaking tests has grown in recent years. However, these assessments have received comparatively little attention when compared to other formats such as the oral proficiency interview (OPI). In order to better understand the local exigencies of this group-based, peer interaction format, the current paper, using a Conversation Analytic (CA) methodology, explores the mechanisms through which consequences are brought about in such highly task-oriented, collaborative discourse. In doing so, I report on examinees’ use of directives to shape the emerging interactional agenda and so negotiate deontic rights relative to their co-participants. There is a focus, in particular, on the turn design and sequential placement of these directives and, from this, it is shown how different linguistic formats correlate to a propensity for recipients to either endorse (that is, enact) or circumvent (ignore, challenge) the interactional agenda imposed by said directive. Finally, this paper discusses some of the implications these findings have in terms of learner and assessor training.
{"title":"Setting the group agenda: negotiating deontic rights through directives in a task-based, oral, L2, group assessment","authors":"M. Stephenson","doi":"10.1080/19463014.2019.1651750","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2019.1651750","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The use of group-based, task-oriented, peer interaction formats in classroom and public L2 speaking tests has grown in recent years. However, these assessments have received comparatively little attention when compared to other formats such as the oral proficiency interview (OPI). In order to better understand the local exigencies of this group-based, peer interaction format, the current paper, using a Conversation Analytic (CA) methodology, explores the mechanisms through which consequences are brought about in such highly task-oriented, collaborative discourse. In doing so, I report on examinees’ use of directives to shape the emerging interactional agenda and so negotiate deontic rights relative to their co-participants. There is a focus, in particular, on the turn design and sequential placement of these directives and, from this, it is shown how different linguistic formats correlate to a propensity for recipients to either endorse (that is, enact) or circumvent (ignore, challenge) the interactional agenda imposed by said directive. Finally, this paper discusses some of the implications these findings have in terms of learner and assessor training.","PeriodicalId":45350,"journal":{"name":"Classroom Discourse","volume":"1 1","pages":"337 - 365"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79832169","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2019.1665562
John Gordon
ABSTRACT This article examines spoken quotation in literary study during discussion of novels in junior and senior classrooms. It focusses on teachers’ third-turn exposition for literary-critical talk, a space where the modality of texts is transformed from print to oral expression. Teachers’ spoken quotation develops students’ sensitivity to how literary texts position their readerly perspective and response. Purposed to disciplinary pedagogic goals, spoken quotation itself has positioning influence, as teachers of literature guide students through multiple orientations to text even within single conversational turns. Methodological innovation adapts conversation analysis to account for the introduction of study texts to talk, the turn of the page as embedded quotation. Called QuoTE analysis, it draws on Bakhtin’s dialogic concept of heteroglossia to demonstrate how spoken quotation in exposition performs, foregrounds and invites changing reader-orientations. Analysis of transcript data additionally finds that teachers’ exposition positions students’ readings explicitly and tacitly, using the modal resources of spoken quotation with methodic subtlety.
{"title":"The turn of the page: spoken quotation in shared reading","authors":"John Gordon","doi":"10.1080/19463014.2019.1665562","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2019.1665562","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines spoken quotation in literary study during discussion of novels in junior and senior classrooms. It focusses on teachers’ third-turn exposition for literary-critical talk, a space where the modality of texts is transformed from print to oral expression. Teachers’ spoken quotation develops students’ sensitivity to how literary texts position their readerly perspective and response. Purposed to disciplinary pedagogic goals, spoken quotation itself has positioning influence, as teachers of literature guide students through multiple orientations to text even within single conversational turns. Methodological innovation adapts conversation analysis to account for the introduction of study texts to talk, the turn of the page as embedded quotation. Called QuoTE analysis, it draws on Bakhtin’s dialogic concept of heteroglossia to demonstrate how spoken quotation in exposition performs, foregrounds and invites changing reader-orientations. Analysis of transcript data additionally finds that teachers’ exposition positions students’ readings explicitly and tacitly, using the modal resources of spoken quotation with methodic subtlety.","PeriodicalId":45350,"journal":{"name":"Classroom Discourse","volume":"10 1","pages":"366 - 387"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85882714","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-18DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2020.1810724
Jaume Batlle, M. Suárez
ABSTRACT Listening materials are commonly developed so students show their understanding of a specific oral discourse. Oral interactions provided in textbooks are resources in which different interactional practices are involved, repair practices being one of these. This article seeks to explore, first, the types of repair practices found in Spanish as a Foreign Language (SFL) textbook listening interactions and, second, the relationship between repairs and other characteristics of the interactions to determine to what extent SFL listening practices are appropriate resources to show examples of repair work and to develop the students’ Interactional Competence. Following a Conversation Analysis perspective, 109 repairs in 504 SFL audiotaped listening materials from 18 textbooks are analysed. The results show that repairs are not a common practice in listening materials, other-initiated self-repairs being the most common type of repair work. A disparity is also observed in establishing repair through listening materials depending on the textbook. Some of them include self-repairs together with other interactional features, such as overlapped turns, articulated pauses or response tokens, while other textbooks rarely present any repair work. These findings improve our understanding of the degree of authenticity of listening materials, which might help students develop their interactional competence.
{"title":"An analysis of repair practices in L2 Spanish listening comprehension materials with implications for teaching interactional competence","authors":"Jaume Batlle, M. Suárez","doi":"10.1080/19463014.2020.1810724","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2020.1810724","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Listening materials are commonly developed so students show their understanding of a specific oral discourse. Oral interactions provided in textbooks are resources in which different interactional practices are involved, repair practices being one of these. This article seeks to explore, first, the types of repair practices found in Spanish as a Foreign Language (SFL) textbook listening interactions and, second, the relationship between repairs and other characteristics of the interactions to determine to what extent SFL listening practices are appropriate resources to show examples of repair work and to develop the students’ Interactional Competence. Following a Conversation Analysis perspective, 109 repairs in 504 SFL audiotaped listening materials from 18 textbooks are analysed. The results show that repairs are not a common practice in listening materials, other-initiated self-repairs being the most common type of repair work. A disparity is also observed in establishing repair through listening materials depending on the textbook. Some of them include self-repairs together with other interactional features, such as overlapped turns, articulated pauses or response tokens, while other textbooks rarely present any repair work. These findings improve our understanding of the degree of authenticity of listening materials, which might help students develop their interactional competence.","PeriodicalId":45350,"journal":{"name":"Classroom Discourse","volume":"10 1","pages":"365 - 385"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89765392","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-08DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2020.1808495
Riikka Tumelius, Leena Kuure
ABSTRACT Technology development allows new ways of communication, learning and collaboration. This is reflected in the professional scenarios of language teaching. Modern curricula value participants’ interest and meaningful (inter)action as a basis for learning. Sensitivity is important in anticipating participants’ changing needs in modern learning environments, characterised by linguistic and technological hybridity, as well as novel pedagogical approaches. Language students, more familiar with teaching in the traditional classroom, need to appropriate new practices to orchestrate learning in settings requiring multiple activities simultaneously. This study explores how language students learn to manage complex pedagogical situations during a university course in which they create an online project for school children. During online chat sessions administered for the school pupils, the university lecturer’s office was an important site for negotiating and acting on pedagogical issues as well as practical matters arising from the work at hand. Nexus analysis was used as a research approach. Primary research materials include video recordings from the university lecturer’s office, chatlogs and reflection papers from students. The study is relevant for reconceptualising the changing roles of (language) teachers and provides new perspectives for language teacher education in a technology-rich world.
{"title":"Towards a shared vision of language, language learning, and a school project in emergence","authors":"Riikka Tumelius, Leena Kuure","doi":"10.1080/19463014.2020.1808495","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2020.1808495","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Technology development allows new ways of communication, learning and collaboration. This is reflected in the professional scenarios of language teaching. Modern curricula value participants’ interest and meaningful (inter)action as a basis for learning. Sensitivity is important in anticipating participants’ changing needs in modern learning environments, characterised by linguistic and technological hybridity, as well as novel pedagogical approaches. Language students, more familiar with teaching in the traditional classroom, need to appropriate new practices to orchestrate learning in settings requiring multiple activities simultaneously. This study explores how language students learn to manage complex pedagogical situations during a university course in which they create an online project for school children. During online chat sessions administered for the school pupils, the university lecturer’s office was an important site for negotiating and acting on pedagogical issues as well as practical matters arising from the work at hand. Nexus analysis was used as a research approach. Primary research materials include video recordings from the university lecturer’s office, chatlogs and reflection papers from students. The study is relevant for reconceptualising the changing roles of (language) teachers and provides new perspectives for language teacher education in a technology-rich world.","PeriodicalId":45350,"journal":{"name":"Classroom Discourse","volume":"34 1","pages":"344 - 364"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2020-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81169197","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：