EMI科学课堂互动中的教师提问、等待时间与学生产出:跨学科观点

IF 3.7 1区 文学 Q1 LINGUISTICS Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching Pub Date : 2023-06-29 DOI:10.14746/ssllt.38283
Jiangshan An, A. Childs
{"title":"EMI科学课堂互动中的教师提问、等待时间与学生产出:跨学科观点","authors":"Jiangshan An, A. Childs","doi":"10.14746/ssllt.38283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Past research has often shown a lack of student output in English medium instruction (EMI) classes (e.g., An et al., 2021; Lo & Macaro, 2012) and this study seeks to identify possible reasons. Guided by literature on wait time (Rowe, 1986) and teacher higher-order thinking questions (Chin, 2007), this study explores whether these two pedagogical moves have the same impact on classroom interaction in EMI science classes. 30 EMI science lessons were recorded from seven EMI high school programs in China, taught by 15 native speakers of English to homogenous groups of Chinese students. Correlation tests showed that when there was more wait time after a teacher question, the students produced lengthier responses with more linguistic complexity, took up more talk time, and asked more questions. However, greater use of teacher higher-order thinking questions, coded by Chin’s (2007) framework of constructivist questions, did not correlate with any student output measures. This suggests that wait time may be a more effective factor leading to more student output in EMI classes than asking higher-order thinking questions. Qualitative analysis showed teachers’ follow-up moves may have also played a role in the limited success of higher-order thinking questions.","PeriodicalId":46277,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","volume":"417 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teacher questions, wait time, and student output in classroom interaction in EMI science classes: An interdisciplinary view\",\"authors\":\"Jiangshan An, A. Childs\",\"doi\":\"10.14746/ssllt.38283\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Past research has often shown a lack of student output in English medium instruction (EMI) classes (e.g., An et al., 2021; Lo & Macaro, 2012) and this study seeks to identify possible reasons. Guided by literature on wait time (Rowe, 1986) and teacher higher-order thinking questions (Chin, 2007), this study explores whether these two pedagogical moves have the same impact on classroom interaction in EMI science classes. 30 EMI science lessons were recorded from seven EMI high school programs in China, taught by 15 native speakers of English to homogenous groups of Chinese students. Correlation tests showed that when there was more wait time after a teacher question, the students produced lengthier responses with more linguistic complexity, took up more talk time, and asked more questions. However, greater use of teacher higher-order thinking questions, coded by Chin’s (2007) framework of constructivist questions, did not correlate with any student output measures. This suggests that wait time may be a more effective factor leading to more student output in EMI classes than asking higher-order thinking questions. Qualitative analysis showed teachers’ follow-up moves may have also played a role in the limited success of higher-order thinking questions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46277,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching\",\"volume\":\"417 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.38283\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.38283","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

过去的研究经常表明,在英语媒介教学(EMI)课程中缺乏学生的产出(例如,An等人,2021;Lo & Macaro, 2012),本研究试图找出可能的原因。本研究以等待时间(Rowe, 1986)和教师高阶思考问题(Chin, 2007)的文献为指导,探讨这两种教学动作对EMI科学课堂的课堂互动是否有相同的影响。本研究记录了EMI在中国七个高中项目的30节科学课,由15名母语为英语的中国学生授课。相关测试表明,当老师提问后等待时间越长,学生的回答就越长,语言越复杂,占用的谈话时间也越多,提问的问题也越多。然而,更多地使用教师的高阶思维问题(由Chin(2007)的建构主义问题框架编码)与任何学生产出测量都不相关。这表明,等待时间可能是一个更有效的因素,导致更多的学生在EMI课程输出比问高阶思考问题。定性分析表明,教师的后续行动可能也在高阶思维问题的有限成功中发挥了作用。
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 questions, wait time, and student output in classroom interaction in EMI science classes: An interdisciplinary view
Past research has often shown a lack of student output in English medium instruction (EMI) classes (e.g., An et al., 2021; Lo & Macaro, 2012) and this study seeks to identify possible reasons. Guided by literature on wait time (Rowe, 1986) and teacher higher-order thinking questions (Chin, 2007), this study explores whether these two pedagogical moves have the same impact on classroom interaction in EMI science classes. 30 EMI science lessons were recorded from seven EMI high school programs in China, taught by 15 native speakers of English to homogenous groups of Chinese students. Correlation tests showed that when there was more wait time after a teacher question, the students produced lengthier responses with more linguistic complexity, took up more talk time, and asked more questions. However, greater use of teacher higher-order thinking questions, coded by Chin’s (2007) framework of constructivist questions, did not correlate with any student output measures. This suggests that wait time may be a more effective factor leading to more student output in EMI classes than asking higher-order thinking questions. Qualitative analysis showed teachers’ follow-up moves may have also played a role in the limited success of higher-order thinking questions.
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
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
2.90%
发文量
21
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching (ISSN 2083-5205) is a refereed journal published four times a year by the Department of English Studies, Faculty of Pedagogy and Fine Arts, Adam Mickiewicz University, Kalisz, Poland. The language of publication is English. The journal is devoted to reporting previously unpublished highest quality theoretical and empirical research on learning and teaching second and foreign languages. It deals with the learning and teaching of any language, not only English, and focuses on a variety of topics ranging from the processes underlying second language acquisition, various aspects of language learning in instructed and non-instructed settings, as well as different facets of the teaching process, including syllabus choice, materials design, classroom practices and evaluation. Each issue carries about 6 papers, 6000-8000 words in length, as well as reply articles and reviews. At least one of the four issues per year is a special focus issue devoted to a particular area of second language learning and teaching, sometimes with a guest editor who is an expert on a specific topic.
期刊最新文献
Reviewers for Volume 13/2023 Collaboration network of applied linguistics research articles with different methodological orientations Interaction in written texts: A bibliometric study of published research Modeling quality and prestige in applied linguistics journals: A bibliometric and synthetic analysis Introduction to the special issue on Introducing bibliometrics in applied linguistics
×
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