|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| The term dialogue is intended to imply a deeper level of analysis or explanation than that which concerns itself only with the surface meaning of talk as isolated expressions made by individuals. When we talk about dialogue, we are talking about the joint enterprise of talk, as a cumultative (building up over time) activity which is aimed at some purpose or other. In education, the purpose we are most often interested in is learning, in a rather broad sense. | | The term dialogue is intended to imply a deeper level of analysis or explanation than that which concerns itself only with the surface meaning of talk as isolated expressions made by individuals. When we talk about dialogue, we are talking about the joint enterprise of talk, as a cumultative (building up over time) activity which is aimed at some purpose or other. In education, the purpose we are most often interested in is learning, in a rather broad sense. |
|
| |
|
| In classrooms such dialogue occurs in a variety of settings, including [[Teaching Approaches/Whole Class|whole class]] work and [[Teaching Approaches/Group Talk|group talk]] in [[Teaching Approaches/Group Work|group work]] contexts. Research indicates that the most effective sorts of dialogue are | | In classrooms such dialogue occurs in a variety of settings, including [[Teaching Approaches/Whole Class|whole class]] work and [[Teaching Approaches/Group Talk|group talk]] in [[Teaching Approaches/Group Work|group work]] contexts. Research indicates that the most effective sorts of dialogue |
| # Often not reflected in classroom talk | | # Are often not reflected in classroom talk |
| # Are not simply question and response (IRF) exchanges, but are [[Teaching Approaches/Dialogic Teaching|dialogic]] in nature | | # Are not simply question and response (IRF) exchanges, but are [[Teaching Approaches/Dialogic Teaching|dialogic]] in nature |
| | # Are mutually respectful, and involve [[exploratory talk]] which seeks to build a shared understanding between talk partners (what Edwards and Mercer (1987) termed 'Common Knowledge') |
|
| |
|
| | | Dialogue is a recuring theme on this wiki, and in particular is covered in context in subsequent sections. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| == What do we mean by dialogue? ==
| |
| {{adaptedfrom|Purposes and characteristics of whole-class dialogue|DialogueIntro|The difficulties of defining dialogue begin with the question of how many can take part before it turns into something else. In ordinary conversation, the managing of turns is a shared responsibility, and competition for 'having one's say' in groups larger than, for example, half a dozen makes a diversion into parallel conversations very likely. Most classroom talk, in contrast, involves a centralised communication system. Teachers direct the talk by doing most of it themselves, combining lengthy exposition with many questions, allocating the right or obligation to answer those questions and evaluating the answers. The transmission of knowledge creates very unequal communicative rights to those who 'know' and those who do not. This is why the sequence of (teacher) initiation - (pupil) response - (teacher) evaluation has emerged from so many research studies as the 'essential teaching exchange'<sup>1</sup> In whole-class questioning, it carries risks that a single right answer will be taken as representing a class-wide understanding and a single wrong answer as a common failure to get the point. }}
| |
| | |
| == The Importance of Talk ==
| |
| {{adaptedfrom|The Importance of Speaking and Listening|ImportanceOfTalk|Recent research has shown the importance of the link between spoken language, learning and cognitive development (e.g. Mercer, Wegerif & Dawes, 1999; Mercer, Dawes, Wegerif & Sams, 2004 – see below). Through using language and hearing how others use it, children become able to describe the world, make sense of life's experiences and get things done. They learn to use language as a tool for thinking, collectively and alone. However, children will not learn how to make the best use of language as a tool for communicating and thinking without guidance from their teachers. School may provide the only opportunity many children have for acquiring some extremely important speaking, listening and thinking skills.
| |
| | |
| '''<center>For the research findings which underpin these claims, see:</center>'''
| |
| | |
| Mercer, N., Wegerif, R. and Dawes, L. (1999) 'Children's talk and the development of reasoning in the classroom', ''British Educational Research Journal'', 25, 1, 95-111
| |
| | |
| Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: ways of helping children to use language to learn science. ''British Educational Research Journal'', 30, 3, 367-385.}}
| |
| | |
| == A Typical Classroom Sequence ==
| |
| {{adaptedfrom|The Importance of Speaking and Listening|IRF|A striking insight provided by classroom research is that much talk between teachers and their pupils has the following pattern: a teacher's question, a pupil's response, and then an evaluative comment by the teacher. This is described as an Initiation-Response-Feedback exchange, or IRF. Here's an example<br />
| |
| | |
| :'''I''' Teacher - What's the capital city of Argentina?
| |
| :'''R''' Pupil - Buenos Aires
| |
| :'''F''' Teacher - Yes, well done
| |
| | |
| This pattern was first pointed out in the 1970s by the British researchers Sinclair and Coulthard. Their original research was reported in
| |
| :Sinclair, J. and Coulthard, M. (1975) ''Towards an Analysis of Discourse: the English used by Teachers and Pupils.'' London: Oxford University Press.
| |
| | |
| Sinclair and Coulthard's research has been the basis for extended debates about whether or not teachers should ask so many questions to which they already know the answer; and further debate about the range of uses and purposes of IRF in working classrooms. Despite all this, it seems that many teachers (even those who have qualified in recent decades) have not heard of it. Is this because their training did not include any examination of the structures of classroom talk – or because even if it did, the practical value of such an examination was not made clear?
| |
| | |
| A teacher's professional development (and, indeed, the development of members of any profession) should involve the gaining of critical insights into professional practice – to learn to see behind the ordinary, the taken for granted, and to question the effectiveness of what is normally done. Recognizing the inherent structure of teacher-pupil talk is a valuable step in that direction. Student teachers need to see how they almost inevitably converge on other teachers' style and generate the conventional patterns of classroom talk. By noting this, they can begin to consider what effects this has on pupil participation in class. There is nothing wrong with the use of IRFs by teachers, but question-and-answer routines can be used both productively and unproductively. By understanding and questioning what generally happens, students can begin to construct the kind of dialogues that they can feel confident have most educational value.}}
| |
| | |
| == The What, Why, and How's of Group Talk in Classroom Contexts ==
| |
| {{adaptedfrom|Group Talk - Benefits for Science Teaching|Whole|'''What is meant by ‘group talk’ and ‘argument’?'''
| |
| | |
| Group talk includes any activity where pupils’ ideas are explored ''verbally between pupils'', even if the final product is written or practical. It includes verbal argument (in this context the word ''argument ''is used to describe discussion between pupils who hold differing views) as much as more formal debates (about contentious topics such as genetic engineering). Group talk can be both collaborative and competitive.
| |
| | |
| '''Stop and think'''
| |
| | |
| Before reading ahead, jot down your first thoughts to complete the following statements:
| |
| | |
| # An activity a science/maths teacher might carry out that could be called a ‘group talk’ activity is …
| |
| # If the activity was successful, what I would expect to see the pupils doing is …and what I would expect to hear in their conversations is …and what I would expect to see the teacher doing is …
| |
| # The benefits to the learner of science/maths would be …
| |
| # A teacher might not use group talk activities, giving reasons, such as …
| |
| | |
| '''What does successful group talk and argument look like?'''
| |
| | |
| When you take part in productive talk as an adult, you make suggestions and support, modify or clarify others’ views. You challenge ideas, ask questions to seek clarification, summarise and evaluate the pros and cons. You care about your own opinions, but allow others to shape and counter them.
| |
| | |
| In lessons where productive group talk is taking place you will see pupils discussing ideas with each other independently of, but guided by, the teacher. Pupils will often be turning to face each other, making and maintaining eye contact with others and using animated expressions with their eyes, face and through gesture. They will want to convince others, but will be looking for opportunities to consider others’ views. Words and phrases related to reasoning (such as ''because, why?, what if ...?'') will be used. At times, pupils will be thinking and saying little as they listen to others. The teacher will be aware of the progress of the conversations and intervening without interrupting the flow of the talk. The pupils will be in control of the time taken on a discussion and will be clear on what they are expected to produce as a result of the activity.
| |
| | |
| When the group talk is over, pupils may have changed their minds at least once. They will be able to explain their current viewpoint and any previous opinions they held, as well as some of the views held by others.
| |
| | |
| '''Why do it? What are the benefits to the learner?'''
| |
| | |
| *'''Higher-level thinking '''Pupils are challenged to defend, review and modify their ideas with their peers. It encourages reflection and metacognition (thinking about one’s own thinking). Pupils often communicate ideas better with other pupils than with teachers.
| |
| | |
| *'''Assessment for learning '''Effectively reveals the progress of the pupil to the teacher, encouraging the pupil to self- and peer-assess while allowing the teacher to plan more effectively. As such, group talk complements methods embraced as ''Assessment for learning''.
| |
| | |
| *'''Illustrating science in action '''Working scientists use group talk – in class it models how they work, supporting the teaching of the ‘ideas and evidence’ aspects of scientific enquiry.
| |
| | |
| * '''Developing the whole child '''The ability to resolve disagreements is a life-skill.
| |
| | |
| Pupils become more reflective as they try to arrive at a consensus by expressing different points of view; or work collaboratively to explore ideas, plan and make decisions. Further, it supports the development of literacy.
| |
| | |
| *'''Pupil motivation and emotional involvement '''When argument is taking place, and pupils are actively prompted and provoked to defend a point of view – by the teacher and by others – it raises the emotional involvement in a topic, so that pupils are more engaged. In essence, they are being encouraged to ‘care’ about the science viewpoint they have, and to take a stand for or against it, even if they concede to others along the way. These features are more common in good English, RE and humanities lessons.
| |
| | |
| *'''Variety and learning styles '''Can be used as an alternative to written or practical work (for example, experiments), or just listening as the teacher explains and demonstrates. Group talk encourages the use of different learning styles and thus can be inclusive to pupils excluded from more traditional (and often written) activities.
| |
| | |
| '''Why is group talk relatively uncommon in science and maths lessons? What are the issues expressed by teachers?'''
| |
| | |
| * '''External factors '''Many teachers may feel a pressure to ‘deliver the curriculum’. There is no time in the lesson to do more than impart information. Also, the teacher may be concerned about having evidence of work having taken place (for example, usually something written down in books) – for others in the school, for parents or for Ofsted.
| |
| | |
| *'''Internal factors '''The teacher may be reluctant to take a risk with group talk because they are afraid that discipline will be a problem. They do not feel comfortable with the apparent loss of control and, as their pupils are not used to being given this level of freedom to express their ideas, they may be reluctant or misbehave. If group talk has been tried in the past it may have been unsuccessful because of a lack of consideration of factors such as classroom layout and teacher behaviour.
| |
| | |
| '''When are pupils more likely to engage in group talk and argument?'''
| |
| | |
| *when seating arrangements and environment are planned in order to facilitate discussion;
| |
| *when the teacher’s language and non-verbal communication are planned in advance in order to promote pupil confidence in the stimulus material for group talk;
| |
| * when the teacher withholds their opinion, or the answers for longer than usual;
| |
| * when groupings are chosen by the teacher, and are regularly changed;
| |
| * when timings are specifically used and usually kept short;
| |
| *when group talk is used regularly and becomes part of everyday science lessons.
| |
| | |
| It is the ''teacher skills ''of running group talk that require the most effort to develop and are the focus of this unit. Once developed, they can then be used with little preparation on the part of the teacher, allowing them to be a regular feature of lessons.
| |
| | |
| The ideas presented in this unit complement those in the resources [[Questioning]] and other resources in the [[Category:Questioning]]
| |
| | |
| '''Why use group talk: a teacher’s perspective'''
| |
| Think of a class you are going to teach next week that might be amenable to this way of working.
| |
| | |
| Warn them that you are going to try something different with them next lesson. Plan for a plenary activity which will encourage group talk. For example, pose a question such as ‘How does the density of the particles in water change as ice melts?’ Give the pupils two minutes think time, then ask them to pair up and come up with a consensus model to explain what they think is happening. The pairs should then be instructed to convince another pair that they have the best model. Some of the models are then shared with the rest of the class.
| |
| | |
| Or this might be by setting them a contentious question that they have to answer by the end of the lesson.
| |
| | |
| Make sure that you leave sufficient time to do the activity justice.
| |
| | |
| Evaluate how successful the activity was. If you feel that you could have organised the plenary differently, then make a note of this for next time.
| |
| | |
| '''Try an activity'''
| |
| Read [[Group Talk in Science - Research Summary]]. Use a highlighter pen and mark those reasons for the promotion of effective group talk which are the most important for you in your lessons.}}
| |
