Creating Dialogue in the Classroom

Tommi Eranpalo, Cynthia K Jorgenson

Abstract


This study ponders with a common problem in teaching second language: How to encourage students to a conversation in lessons. The research was conducted with a group of student teachers during their second-year practicum at Sas al Nakhl Boys School located in Abu Dhabi. The study examines the impact introducing theoretical discourse models for teachers and monitoring the level of dialogue practiced before and after the introduction. The results are showing a significant improvement in the quality of classroom dialogue after the instructions. This indicates that teachers can raise the level of dialogue practiced in the classroom even in a short time when attention is paid to it.


Keywords


Abu Dhabi, dialogue teaching, action research, action study, student teachers

Full Text:

PDF

References


ADEK (2017). Abu Dhabi Department of Education and Knowledge. Retrieved from https://www.adek.abudhabi.ae/ar/Pages/default.aspx

Alexander, R.J. (2000). Culture and pedagogy: International comparisons in primary education. Oxford: Blackwell.

Alexander, R.J. (2004). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.

Alon, U. (2009). How to choose a good scientific problem. Molecular Cell, 35, 726–728.

Antonius, R. (2003). Interpreting quantitative data with SPSS. London: Sage Publications.

Atkins, L. & Wallace, S. (2012). Qualitative research in education. London: Sage Publications.

Bakhtin, M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Ball, A. F. & Freedman, S. W. (Eds.) (2004) Bakhtinian perspectives on language, literacy and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brice, A., & Brice, R. (2009). Language development: Monolingual and bilingual acquisition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Brouwer, C., Rasmussen, G. & Wagner, J. (2004) Embedded corrections in second language talk. In: R. Gardner & J. Wagner (Eds.) Second language conversations. London: Continuum.

Catts, W.W. & Kamhi, A.J. (1999). Language and learning disabilities. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Cheyne, J.A. & Tarulli, D. (1999). Dialogue, difference and the ‘third voice’ in the zone of proximal development. Theory and Psychology, 9(1), 5–28.

Conti-Ramsden, G., Knox, E., Bottong, N. & Simkin, Z. (2002). Educational placements and key stage 2 test outcomes of children with a history of specific language impairment. British Journal of Special Education 29 (2), 76–82.

Cunningham, A. E. & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability ten years later. Developmental Psychology 33 (6), 934–945.

Dawes, L. & Sams, C. (2004). The capacity to collaborate. In: K. Littleton, D. Miell & D. Faulkner (Eds.) Learning to collaborate: collaborating to learn. New York: Nova Press.

ECAE. (2017). Emirates College of Advanced Learning. Retrieved from http://www.ecae.ac.ae

Englund, B. & Sandström, B. (2012). Dialogen som idé och praktik. Stockholm: Carlssons.

Ferholt, B. (2010). A Multiperspectival Analysis of Creative Imagining: applying Vygotsky’s method of literary analysis to a playworld. In: C. Connery, V. John-Steiner & A. Marjanovic-Shane (Eds.) Vygotsky and Creativity: a cultural-historical approach to play, meaning-making and the arts. New York: Peter Lang.

Hall, J.K. & Walsh, M. (2002). Teacher– student interaction and language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 22, 186– 203.

Haneda, M. (2004). The joint construction of meaning in writing conferences. Applied Linguistics 25, 178– 219.

Harinen, P. & Halme, J. (2012). Hyvä, paha koulu, koulu hyvinvointia hakemassa. Unicef. Nuorisoverkkotutkimus verkkojulkaisuja 56. Helsinki: Unigrafia Oy.

Hatcher, P.J. & Hulme, C. (1999). Phonemes, rhymes and intelligence as predictors of children’s responsiveness to remedial reading instruction: evidence from a longitudinal intervention study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 72, 130–153.

Hermam, A. & Edwards, J. (2014). Methodological Wishes for the Next Decade and How to Make Wishes Come True. Journal of Management Studies 51, 143–174.

Hughes, M. & Westgate, D. (1997). Assistants as Talk-partners in Early Years Classrooms: some issues of support and development. Educational Review 49 (1), 5–12.

Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner. Deakin: University Press.

Laine, S. (2012). Young actors in transnational agoras: Multi-sited ethnography of cosmopolitan micro political orientations. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.

Locke, A., Ginsborg, J. & Peers, I. (2002). Development and disadvantage: implications for the early years and beyond. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders 37 (1), 3–15.

Morgan, D. & Krueger, R. (1998). Analyzing and reporting focus group results. SAGE Publications.

Nathan, L., Stackhouse, J., Goulandris, N. & Snowling, M. (2004). Educational consequences of developmental speech disorder: Key Stage 1 National Curriculum assessment results in English and mathematics. British Journal of Educational Psychology 74, 173–186.

Nassaji, H., & Wells, G. (2000). What’s the use of ‘triadic dialogue’? An investigation of teacher-student interaction. Applied Linguistics 21, 333–363.

Oczkus, L.D. (2003). Reciprocal teaching at work: Strategies for improving reading comprehension. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Palincsar, A.S. (1986). Reciprocal teaching. In Teaching reading as thinking. Oak Brook, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.

Radford, J., Ireson, J. & Mahon, M. (2006). Triadic dialogue in oral communication tasks: What are the implications for language learning? Language and Education 20 (3), 191–210.

Rader, S. & Summerville, T. (2014). Creating Dialogue in the Classroom. UNBC Teaching Manual.

Reddy, M. (1979). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In: A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Riel, M. (2010): Understanding Action Research. Pepperdine University: Center For Collaborative Action Research.

Rommetveit, R. (1985). Language acquisition as increasing linguistic structuring of experience and symbolic behavior control. In: J. V. Wensch (Ed.) Culture, communication, and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Saville-Troike, M. & Barto, K. (2016). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge Introductions to Language and Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Schostak, J.F. & Schostak, J.R. (2013). Writing research critically and radically: The power to make a difference. London: Routledge.

Schurink, W., Fouché, C.B. & de Vos, A.S. (2011). Qualitative data analysis and interpretation. In: A.S. de Vos, H. Strydom, C.B. Fouché, & C.S.L. Delport (Eds.). Research at grass roots: For the social sciences and human service professions (4th ed.). Pretoria: Van Schaik.

Snow, C. E. (2001) Preventing reading difficulties in young children: Precursors and fallout. In: T. Loveless (Ed.) The Great Curriculum debate: How Should We Teach Reading and Math? Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution.

Tharp, R. & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life. New York: Cambridge

Tuckman, E. & Harper, B. (2012). Conducting educational research. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Wells, G. (2006). Monologic and dialogic discourses as mediators of education. Research in the Teaching of English 41(2), 168–175.

Zambrana, IM., Pons, F., Eadie, P. & Ystrom, E. (2014). Trajectories of language delay from age 3 to 5: persistence, recovery and late onset. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders 49, 304–316.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences

Print version: 1694-2620
Online version: 1694-2639