Žákovská participace jako předmět akčního výzkumu

Variant title
Student participation as the focus of action research
Source document: Studia paedagogica. 2015, vol. 20, iss. 2, pp. [33]-58
Extent
[33]-58
  • ISSN
    1803-7437 (print)
    2336-4521 (online)
Type: Article
Language
Czech
License: Not specified license
Abstract(s)
Cílem této studie je analyzovat změny v participaci žáků na výukové komunikaci, k nimž došlo v důsledku zapojení učitelů do projektu akčního výzkumu zaměřeného na implementaci principů dialogického vyučování. Participace je operacionalizována jako: 1) výukový čas, který žáci vyplňují svými promluvami; 2) příležitost žáků k rozvitým promluvám; 3) triadická interakce, tedy bez prostřední komunikace mezi větším počtem aktérů, než je jeden žák a učitel. Prostřednictvím kvantitativní analýzy v příspěvku prokazujeme, že v hodinách sledovaných učitelů došlo ke zřetelnému posílení žákovské participace, a to ve všech uvedených parametrech. Následně pomocí kvalitativní analýzy identifikujeme mechanismy, které k tomuto výsledku vedou.
The aim of this paper is to analyse changes in participation of students in classroom discourse which arose due to their teachers' involvement in an action research project on implementation of principles of dialogic teaching. Participation is operationalized as: (i) an amount of time during which students speak; (ii) an opportunity given to students to produce more complex utterances; (iii) a triadic interaction, which means spontaneous communication between more participants than one teacher and one student. Using quantitative analysis, we show that student participation was significantly strengthened in all of the above-mentioned parameters in the classes under observation. Finally, we use qualitative analysis to identify mechanisms that lead to this result.
Note
  • Tento článek vznikl v rámci projektu Učitel a žáci v dialogickém vyučování, jenž je financován Grantovou agenturou České republiky (GA13-23578S).
Document
References:
[1] Alexander, R. (2001). Culture and pedagogy: International comparisons in primary education. London: Blackwell.

[2] Alexander, R. (2006). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. Cambridge: Dialogos.

[3] Applebee, A. N., Langer, J., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school English. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 685–730. | DOI 10.3102/00028312040003685

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

[5] Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin. Austin: University of Texas Press.

[6] Black, L. (2004). Differential participation in whole-class discussions and the construction of marginalised identities. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 5(1), 34–54.

[7] Black, L. (2007). Analysing cultural models in socio-cultural discourse analysis. International Journal of Educational Research, 46(1–2), 20–30. | DOI 10.1016/j.ijer.2007.07.003

[8] Borko, H., Jacobs, J., Eiteljorg, E., & Pittman, M. E. (2008). Video as a tool for fostering productive discussions in mathematics professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 417–436. | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.012

[9] Boyd, M., & Rubin, D. (2002). Elaborated student talk in an elementary ESoL classroom. Research in the Teaching of English, 36(4), 495–530.

[10] Boyd, M., & Rubin, D. (2006). How contingent questioning promotes extended student talk: A function of display questions. Journal of Literacy Research, 38(2), 141–169. | DOI 10.1207/s15548430jlr3802_2

[11] Burns, Ch., & Myhill, D. (2004). Interactive or inactive? A consideration of the nature of interaction in whole class teaching. Cambridge Journal of Education, 34(1), 35–50. | DOI 10.1080/0305764042000183115

[12] Candela, A. (2005). Students' participation as co-authoring of school institutional practices. Culture & Psychology, 11(3), 321–337. | DOI 10.1177/1354067X05055523

[13] Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse. The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth: Heineman.

[14] Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R. C., & Waggoner, M. A. (2001). Patterns of discourse in two kinds of literature discussion. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 378–411. | DOI 10.1598/RRQ.36.4.3

[15] Cornelius, L. L., & Herrenkohl, L. R. (2004). Power in the classroom: How the classroom environment shapes students' relationships with each other and with concepts. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 467–498. | DOI 10.1207/s1532690Xci2204_4

[16] Corrie, L. (1997). The interaction between teachers' knowledge and skills when managing a troublesome classroom behaviour. Cambridge Journal of Education, 27(1), 93–105. | DOI 10.1080/0305764970270108

[17] Emanuelsson, J., & Sahlstrom, F. (2008). The price of participation: Teacher control versus student participation in classroom interaction. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52(2), 205–223. | DOI 10.1080/00313830801915853

[18] Finn, J. D., & Cox, D. (1992). Participation and withdrawal among fourth-grade pupils. American Educational Research Journal, 29(1), 141–162. | DOI 10.3102/00028312029001141

[19] Heyd-Metzuyanim, E. (2013). The co-construction of learning difficulties in mathematicsteacher-student interactions and their role in the development of a disabled mathematical identity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(3), 341–368. | DOI 10.1007/s10649-012-9457-z

[20] Kovalainen, M., & Kumpulainen, K. (2007). The social construction of participation in an elementary classroom community. International Journal of Educational Research, 46(3–4), 141–158. | DOI 10.1016/j.ijer.2007.09.011

[21] Kumpulainen, K., & Lipponen, L. (2010). Productive interaction as agentic participation in dialogic enquiry. In K. Littleton & Ch. Howe (Eds.), Educational dialogues. understanding and promoting productive interaction (s. 48–63). London, New York: Routledge.

[22] Lefstein, A. (2002). Thinking power and pedagogy apart – coping with discipline in progressivist school reform. Teachers College Record, 104(8), 1627–1655. | DOI 10.1111/1467-9620.00215

[23] Lefstein, A., & Snell, J. (2014). Better than best practice: Developing teaching and learning through dialogue. London: Routledge.

[24] Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Social organisation in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

[25] Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds. How we use language to think together. London: Routledge.

[26] Molinari, L., & Mameli, C. (2013). Process quality of classroom discourse: Pupil participation and learning opportunities. International Journal of Educational Research, 62(1), 249–258. | DOI 10.1016/j.ijer.2013.05.003

[27] Myhill, D. (2008). Bad boys and good girls? Patterns of interaction and response in whole class teaching. British Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 339–352. | DOI 10.1080/01411920220137430

[28] Nassaji, H., & Wells, G. (2000). What's the use of 'Triadic dialogue'? An investigation of teacher–student interaction. Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 376–406. | DOI 10.1093/applin/21.3.376

[29] Nystrand, M., Gamoran, A., Kachur, R., & Prendergast, C. (1997). Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York, London: Teachers College Press.

[30] Oliveira, A. W. (2010). Engaging students in guided science inquiry discussions: Elementary teachers' oral strategies. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(7), 747–765. | DOI 10.1007/s10972-009-9168-1

[31] Parker, M., & Hurry, J. (2007). Teachers' use of questioning and modelling comprehension skills in primary classrooms. Educational Review, 59(3), 299–314. | DOI 10.1080/00131910701427298

[32] Scott, P., Ametller, J., Mortimer, E., & Emberton, J. (2010). Teaching and learning disciplinary knowledge. In K. Littleton & Ch. Howe (Eds.), Educational dialogues. Understanding and promoting productive interaction (s. 289–303). London, New York: Routledge.

[33] Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating. New York: Cambridge University Press.

[34] Sinclair, J. M., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.

[35] Šeďová, K. (2011). Mocenské konstelace ve výukové komunikaci. Studia paedagogica, 16(1), 89–118.

[36] Šeďová, K., Švaříček, R., & Šalamounová, Z. (2012). Komunikace ve školní třídě. Praha: Portál.

[37] Šeďová, K., Švaříček, R., Sedláček, M., & Šalamounová, Z. (2014). On the way to dialogic teaching: Action research as a means to change classroom discourse. Studia paedagogica, 19(4), 9–43. | DOI 10.5817/SP2014-4-2

[38] Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

[39] Webb, N. M., Franke, M. L., Ing, M., Wong, J., Fernandez, C. H., Shin, N., & Turrou, A. C. (2014). Engaging with others' mathematical ideas: Interrelationships among student participation, teachers instructional practices, and learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 63(1), 79–93. | DOI 10.1016/j.ijer.2013.02.001