Triadické interakce ve výukové komunikaci

Title: Triadické interakce ve výukové komunikaci
Variant title:
  • Triadic interactions in classroom discourse
Source document: Studia paedagogica. 2015, vol. 20, iss. 3, pp. [7]-19
  • ISSN
    1803-7437 (print)
    2336-4521 (online)
Type: Article
License: Not specified license

Notice: These citations are automatically created and might not follow citation rules properly.

Tento článek předkládá kvalitativní analýzu triadických interakcí, jež jsou zde definovány jako diskurzivní sekvence s minimálně třemi účastníky (učitel a alespoň dva žáci), na základě pozorování ve výuce v italských primárních školách. Cílem bylo popsat různé typy triadických interakcí a zdůraznit, jakým z působem mohou tyto třístranné výměny informovat o procesech vyučování a učení. Studie vychází z datového korpusu tvořeného dvaceti výukovými epizodami, které byly zaznamenány formou videonahrávek. Výsledkem je analýza různých typů triadických interakčních sekvencí, které ukazují, jak tradiční IRF struktura může být v průběhu vznikajích diskurzivních interakcí obohacena jednotlivými účastníky komunikace.
This paper presents a qualitative analysis of triadic interactions, which it defines as discursive sequences that involve at least three actors (the teacher and a minimum of two students), observed in Italian primary classrooms. It aims to describe the various triadic configurations of discursive interactions and to underline how these triadic exchanges can be informative in terms of teaching and learning processes. The corpus of data comprises twenty teacher-led activities that were video-recorded in Italian third-grade classrooms. The results present some exemplars of triadic interactive sequences that can be considered as 'telling cases' showing how in the course of emergent interactive micro-processes a traditional IRF sequence can be enriched by the contribution of multiple actors.
[1] Alexander, R. J. (2001). Culture and pedagogy: International comparisons in primary education. Oxford: Blackwell.

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

[3] Boylan, M. (2010). Ecologies of participation in school classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(1), 61–70. | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2009.08.005

[4] Burns, C., & Myhill, D. (2004). Interactive or inactive? A consideration of the nature of interaction in whole class teaching. Cambridge Journal of Education, 34(1), 35–49. | DOI 10.1080/0305764042000183115

[5] Candela, A. (1998). Students' power in classroom discourse. Linguistics and Education, 10(2), 139–163. | DOI 10.1016/S0898-5898(99)80107-7

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

[7] Fernández, M., Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., & Rojas-Drummond, S. M. (2001). Re-conceptualizing "scaffolding" and the zone of proximal development in the context of symmetrical collaborative learning. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 36(2), 40–54.

[8] Haneda, M. (2005). Some functions of triadic dialogue in the classroom: Examples from L2 research. Canadian Modern Language Review, 62(2), 313–333. | DOI 10.3138/cmlr.62.2.313

[9] Hardman, F., Smith, F., & Wall, K. (2003). Interactive whole class teaching in the National Literacy Strategy. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(2), 197–215. | DOI 10.1080/03057640302043

[10] Lefstein, A. (2008). Changing classroom practice through the English National Literacy Strategy: A micro-interactional perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 45(3), 701–737. | DOI 10.3102/0002831208316256

[11] Lin, A. M. Y. (2007). What's the use of "triadic dialogue"? Activity theory, conversation analysis and analysis of pedagogical practices. Pedagogies, 2(2), 77–94. | DOI 10.1080/15544800701343943

[12] Lipponen, L., & Kumpulainen, K. (2011). Acting as accountable authors: Creating interactional spaces for agency work in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(5), 812–819. | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2011.01.001

[13] Lyle, S. (2008). Dialogic teaching: Discussing theoretical contexts and reviewing evidence from classroom practice. Language and Education: an International Journal, 22(3), 222–240. | DOI 10.1080/09500780802152499

[14] Mameli, C., & Molinari, L. (2013). Interactive micro-processes in classroom discourse: Turning points and emergent meanings. Research Papers in Education, 28(2), 196–211. | DOI 10.1080/02671522.2011.610900

[15] Mameli, C., & Molinari, L. (2014). Seeking educational quality in the unfolding of classroom discourse: A focus on microtransitions. Language & Education, 28(2), 103–119. | DOI 10.1080/09500782.2013.771654

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

[17] Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.

[18] Mercer, N. (2008). Talk and the development of reasoning and understanding. Human Development, 51(1), 90–100. | DOI 10.1159/000113158

[19] 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

[20] Molinari, L., Mameli, C., & Gnisci, A. (2013). A sequential analysis of classroom discourse in Italian primary schools. The many faces of the IRF pattern. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3), 414–430. | DOI 10.1111/j.2044-8279.2012.02071.x

[21] Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

[22] Myhill, D. (2006). Talk, talk, talk: Teaching and learning in whole class discourse. Research Papers in Education, 21(1), 19–41. | DOI 10.1080/02671520500445425

[23] 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

[24] Nystrand, M., Wu, L. L., Gamoran, A., Zeiser, S., & Long, D. A. (2003). Questions in time: Investigating the structure and dynamics of unfolding classroom discourse. Discourse Processes, 35(2), 135–198.

[25] O'Connor, C., & Michaels, S. (2007). When dialogue is 'dialogic'. Human Development, 50(1), 275–285. | DOI 10.1159/000106415

[26] Scott, P. H., Mortimer, E. F., & Aguiar, O. G. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90(4), 605–631. | DOI 10.1002/sce.20131

[27] Wegerif, R., & Mercer, N. (1997). A dialogical framework for researching peer talk. In R. Wegerif & P. Scrimshaw (Eds.), Computers and talk in the primary classroom (s. 49–61). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

[28] Wells, G. (1996). Using the tool-kit of discourse in the activity of learning and teaching. Mind, Culture and Activity, 3(2), 74–101.

[29] Wells, G. (2007). Semiotic mediation, dialogue and the construction of knowledge. Human Development, 50(5), 244–274. | DOI 10.1159/000106414

[30] Wells, G., & Arauz, R. M. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379–428. | DOI 10.1207/s15327809jls1503_3

[31] Wilen, W. W. (2004). Refuting misconceptions about classroom discussion. Social Studies, 95(1), 33–39. | DOI 10.3200/TSSS.95.1.33-39