课堂话语中的教师知识与提问

IF 1.1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Literacy Research and Instruction Pub Date : 2022-05-23 DOI:10.1080/19388071.2022.2074328
Margaret Troyer
{"title":"课堂话语中的教师知识与提问","authors":"Margaret Troyer","doi":"10.1080/19388071.2022.2074328","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Open discussion of text promotes students’ reading achievement, yet classroom discussion is rare. The present study investigates whether teachers’ knowledge for literacy teaching relates to their enactment of class discussion in the context of a high-quality literacy curriculum. Two sixth grade teachers (one who demonstrated high levels of knowledge for teaching literacy, and one who demonstrated low knowledge) were audio recorded teaching the same reading lesson. Lesson transcripts were analyzed with a focus on the questions teachers asked. Questions were coded as high – or low-level, and as authentic or display questions. Function of questions and quality of instruction were also explored. The teacher whose knowledge was higher asked more high-level questions, while the teacher with lower knowledge asked more low-level questions. Although both teachers asked more display than authentic questions, a higher proportion of questions asked by the teacher with high knowledge were authentic. The higher-knowledge teacher’s enactment of the lesson also included more student voice, more topical coherence, and a richer understanding of the material. These findings emphasize the importance of teacher knowledge. This work also underscores the importance of developing more robust constructs for knowledge for literacy teaching, and quality of literacy instruction.","PeriodicalId":45434,"journal":{"name":"Literacy Research and Instruction","volume":"62 1","pages":"101 - 126"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teacher Knowledge and Questioning in Classroom Talk about Text\",\"authors\":\"Margaret Troyer\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/19388071.2022.2074328\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Open discussion of text promotes students’ reading achievement, yet classroom discussion is rare. The present study investigates whether teachers’ knowledge for literacy teaching relates to their enactment of class discussion in the context of a high-quality literacy curriculum. Two sixth grade teachers (one who demonstrated high levels of knowledge for teaching literacy, and one who demonstrated low knowledge) were audio recorded teaching the same reading lesson. Lesson transcripts were analyzed with a focus on the questions teachers asked. Questions were coded as high – or low-level, and as authentic or display questions. Function of questions and quality of instruction were also explored. The teacher whose knowledge was higher asked more high-level questions, while the teacher with lower knowledge asked more low-level questions. Although both teachers asked more display than authentic questions, a higher proportion of questions asked by the teacher with high knowledge were authentic. The higher-knowledge teacher’s enactment of the lesson also included more student voice, more topical coherence, and a richer understanding of the material. These findings emphasize the importance of teacher knowledge. This work also underscores the importance of developing more robust constructs for knowledge for literacy teaching, and quality of literacy instruction.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45434,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Literacy Research and Instruction\",\"volume\":\"62 1\",\"pages\":\"101 - 126\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Literacy Research and Instruction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2022.2074328\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Literacy Research and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2022.2074328","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

文本的开放式讨论促进了学生的阅读成绩,但课堂讨论却很少。本研究旨在探讨在高品质的识字课程背景下,教师的识字教学知识是否与课堂讨论的制定有关。两名六年级教师(一名表现出高水平的识字教学知识,另一名表现出低水平的知识)教授相同的阅读课。对课堂记录进行分析,重点关注教师提出的问题。问题被编码为高问题或低问题、真实问题或显示问题。探讨了问题的作用和教学质量。知识水平越高的老师问的问题越高层次,知识水平越低的老师问的问题越低级。虽然两位教师都提出了更多的展示性问题而不是真实性问题,但高知识水平教师提出的问题中真实性问题的比例更高。知识水平较高的教师在课堂上的表现也包括更多学生的声音,更有主题的连贯性,以及对材料更丰富的理解。这些发现强调了教师知识的重要性。这项工作还强调了开发更强大的识字教学知识结构和识字教学质量的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Teacher Knowledge and Questioning in Classroom Talk about Text
ABSTRACT Open discussion of text promotes students’ reading achievement, yet classroom discussion is rare. The present study investigates whether teachers’ knowledge for literacy teaching relates to their enactment of class discussion in the context of a high-quality literacy curriculum. Two sixth grade teachers (one who demonstrated high levels of knowledge for teaching literacy, and one who demonstrated low knowledge) were audio recorded teaching the same reading lesson. Lesson transcripts were analyzed with a focus on the questions teachers asked. Questions were coded as high – or low-level, and as authentic or display questions. Function of questions and quality of instruction were also explored. The teacher whose knowledge was higher asked more high-level questions, while the teacher with lower knowledge asked more low-level questions. Although both teachers asked more display than authentic questions, a higher proportion of questions asked by the teacher with high knowledge were authentic. The higher-knowledge teacher’s enactment of the lesson also included more student voice, more topical coherence, and a richer understanding of the material. These findings emphasize the importance of teacher knowledge. This work also underscores the importance of developing more robust constructs for knowledge for literacy teaching, and quality of literacy instruction.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Literacy Research and Instruction
Literacy Research and Instruction EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Literacy Research and Instruction (formerly Reading Research and Instruction), the official journal of the College Reading Association, is an international refereed professional journal that publishes articles dealing with research and instruction in reading education and allied literacy fields. The journal is especially focused on instructional practices and applied or basic research of special interest to reading and literacy educators. Peer Review Policy: All articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymous refereeing by reviewers.
期刊最新文献
Empowering Adolescent Emergent Readers in Government Schools: An Exploration of Multimodal Texts as Pathways to Comprehension Novice Teachers’ Knowledge of Racial Literacies Effect of Dramatic Storytelling on Emergent Literacy in EFL: Evidence from the UAE Kindergartens Reexamining the Dolch Basic Sight Word List: Contemporary Considerations for Culturally Sustaining Approaches to Assess Sight Word Development A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Synchronous Paired Oral Reading Techniques in Elementary Classrooms
×
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