TEACHER SCHEME FOR EDUCATIONAL DIALOGUE ANALYSIS (T … · 2018-05-30 · T-SEDA Professional...

© 2018 T-SEDA team

TEACHERSCHEMEFOREDUCATIONALDIALOGUEANALYSIS

(T-SEDA)

[email protected]

FarahAhmed,ElisaCalcagni,NubeEstrada,SaraHennessy,FloraHernández,RuthKershner,LisaLee,MariaVrikki,VictoriaCookUniversityofCambridgeFacultyofEducationandNationalAutonomousUniversityofMexico

T-SEDA Professional Learning Pack v.5

2


3

HowdoestheT-SEDApackworkinpractice?

Thispackisdesignedtobeflexibleforconductinganinquiryonwhateverinterestsyouinrelationtoeducationaldialogue.

TryoutT-SEDAinyourclassroomandsendusfeedback([email protected]).Wewouldlovetohearfromyou!

Tool1Self-AuditGrid

StartyourT-SEDAjourneybysystemaBcallyreflecBngon

yourcurrentpracBce.

Tool2ReflecSveCycleforClassroom

Enquiry

Useastep-by-stepreflecBvecycletotransformyour

pracBceandkeeparecordofhowthishappens

Tool3Codingschemeto

idenSfykeydialogicfeatures

IdenBfymomentsofhighqualitydialogueinyour

classroomandthecondiBonsthatcreatethese.


4

Buildingdialogueinrole-playUsingtheself-audittool,Gary,aReceptionClassteacher,wonderedhowfarchildreninhisclassrespondedtoeachotherintherole-playarea.Hedecidedtolookforinstancesofhowthechildrenbuiltoneachother’sideas,seeingthisasbeingthefoundationsofdialoguebetweenthem.Hefoundthatsomechildrenwereabletodeveloptheircreativeexpressionintheirtalkwithothers.However,otherchildrentendedtoplayedontheirownintherole-playarea,focusingondressingupandplayingwithobjects,asopposedtolisteningtowhatotherchildrenweresayingandrespondingtothem.Garydecidedtoaskchildreniftheywantedtoplayinpairsintherole-playareaandtoshareideasabouthowtoplay.Followingthisintervention,hefoundthatchildrenwouldonlyrespondtoothersiftheywereexcitedabouttheirideas.Nevertheless,itenabledsomechildrentobecomemoreawareofothersaspotentialplaypartners.AnditgaveGarysomeideasaboutwhattodonexttoencouragedialoguebetweenthem.

Interrogatingeachother’sideasinhistoryUsingtheself-audittool,Kiran,asecondaryhistoryteacher,wonderedifherstudentsunderstoodhowtointerrogateother’sideasaboutsources.Shedecidedtoobservehowmuchqueryingandchallengingofeachother’sideaswashappeninginpairworklookingatasource.Shebelieveditwasimportantforstudentstoreflectontheirownlearningandbecomeawareoftheimportanceofqueryingothers'ideas.Unbeknownsttothestudentsworkinginpairs,sheaskedsomeotherstudentstouseagridtomakeatallyofhowmanytimeseachstudentinthepairqueriedorchallengedovera10-minuteperiod.Shethenaskedthe'observer'studentstofeedbacktotheclassonhowmuchofthiswentonandwhathappenednext.Thisledtoaproductivediscussionintheclassaboutqueryingandchallengingeachother’sideasaswellasthesourceitself.

DevelopingreasoninginsciencegroupworkUsingtheself-audittool,Lily,ayear5teacherwasconcernedthattherewasn'tenoughreasoninghappeninginherclassroom.ShedecidedtousetheT-SEDAcodingschemetoidentifyhowmanytimesreasoningoccurredinchildren'sgroupworkduringsciencelessons.Sheusedliveobservationsofcertaingroupstorecordinstancesofreasoningoveraseriesofsciencelessons.Shefoundthatsomechildrencontributedreasoningfairlyoften,butothersdidn'treasonpubliclyatall.Shebegantoseeapatterninthatthe'groupleader'didmostofthereasoning.ThisenabledLilytothinkaboutwhatinterventionsshecouldmaketofacilitateallchildreninagrouptoreasontogetherwhensolvingproblemsinscience.

ExamplesofT-SEDAinuse


5

PACKCONTENTS

TheT-SEDApackcontainsthesesections:

● SECTION1:Introduction.Containsanoverviewoftheapproachandtheunderlyingdialogicprinciples.

● SECTION2:CodingframeworkAlistandexplanationofdialoguecategoriesillustratedwithsamplepromptsandcontributions,plusmoregeneraldialogicclassroompractices.

● SECTION3:Developingdialogicpractice.Suggestionsforincorporatingdialogiclearningandteachingintopracticeandfordevelopingtheclassroomlearningenvironmenttosupportdialogue.

● SECTION4:Identifyingaims,interestsandinquiryfocus.IncludesadviceonchoosingspecificdialogiccategoriesfromtheT-SEDAframework(usuallyoneortwocategoriesatatime).

● SECTION5:Observationmethodsincludingtechnicalguidanceforaudio/videorecordingandtranscribing.

● SECTION6:Templatesforobservingandcoding.Includeslessonobservation(time-sampling;checklist;ratingscales).

● SECTION7:WorkedexamplesIllustratesteachers’codingandinterpretationofdialogueindifferentcontexts;includesteachers’findingsandnextsteps.

● SECTION8.Referencestootherresearchondialogueandlinkstorelatedresources.

Somepartsofthepackareseparatelydownloadableforprintingorediting;lookoutforthe icon.


6

SECTION1:IntroductionWhatiseducationaldialogue?Educationaldialoguegrowsfrompeople’sactive involvement indeveloping ideastogether intalk.Theaimofthispack is tohelpyouevaluateandimprovethequalityoftheeducationaldialogueinyourclassroom.Educationaldialogueenablesteachersandstudentstothinktogetheranddeveloprelationshipsthatsupportcollaborativelearning.The Teacher Scheme for Educational Dialogue (T-SEDA) resource pack has been designed to support you in generating high quality educationaldialogueinyourclassrooms.Teacherscontinuouslyreflectonclassroomevents,howevertheyrarelyhavetheopportunityforfine-grainedsystematicobservation. TheT-SEDApackoffers you three tools thathavebeendesigned to support systematic observation anddetailed reflection. They arebasedonthelatestresearchfindingsabouttheimportanceofgeneratinghighqualityeducationaldialoguetohaveanimpactonchildren’sthinkingandattainment.

Tool1-ASelf-AuditGrid(Seepage8)Tool2-AReflectiveCycleofClassroomInquiry(Seepage10andSection3)Tool3-ACodingSchemethatisspecificallydesignedforinvestigatingclassroomdialogue(Section2)

Thispackincludesmuchinformationabouteducationaldialogueinlatersections.Someofthekeyideasandtoolsaresummarisednext:

1) Educationaldialogueandstudentlearning2) Self-audit:Howproductiveisthedialogueinmyclassroom?3) Reflectiveinquiryandteaching4) Analysingclassroomtalk:systematicobservationandcoding5) UsesoftheT-SEDApack6) Theimportanceofclassroomdialogue:furtherinsightsfromresearch7) Keepingeducationalgoalsinmind:workingwithteacherstodevelopT-SEDA


7

1)Educationaldialogueandstudentlearning‘Dialogue’doesnot justmeananykindof talk. Indialogue,participants listen toeachother, theycontributebysharing their ideas, justifying theircontributions andengagingwithothers’ views. Inparticular theyexploreandevaluatedifferentperspectives and reasons.Relevantquestions andcontributions are linked between speakers, allowing knowledge to be built collectivelywithin a lesson or over a series of interconnected lessons.Althoughverbalinteractionsarecentral,dialoguecanbesupportedwithnon-verbalcommunication(e.g.gestures,facialexpressionandeyecontact)andbyusingvisualor technology resources.Silence,physicalmovement, classroomroutinesandethoscanalsobe importantaspectsofdialogue,framingandsupporting(orsometimeshindering)thespokenconversationthatisthemainfocusofthispack.Educationaldialoguetakesdifferentformswithstudentsofdifferentages,fromtheyoungesttooldest,anditcanbedevelopedindifferentareasoflearning.Somefeaturesofproductiveeducationaldialoguealreadyappearinmanyclassroomsbutsustainingproductiveeducationaldialoguetakestime.Itmightalsochallengeparticipants,especiallyiftheyarenotusedtoexpressingtheirviewsatlengthorhavingthemexaminedpublicly.Aseriesofresearchprojects*hasindicatedwhatkindsof‘talkmoves’facilitatehighqualityeducationaldialogueandlearning:

Whichtalkmovesarestronglyassociatedwithlearninggains?·elaboratingandbuildingonideas·invitationstoelaborateandbuildonideas·querying–i.e.respectfullychallengingandquestioningothers’views

Whicharethemostsupportiveelementsofdialogueattheclassroomlevel?

·activestudentparticipation–multiplestudentsgiveextendedcontributionsandengagewithothers’ideas·explicituseoftalkrules–groundrulessupportingdialogicpractices,negotiatedwithstudents

Thesefeaturesofproductivedialogueneedtooccurtogethertohaveasignificantimpactonlearning.Toomuchqueryingwithouttheothersupportiveelementscanevenhaveanegativeeffect!

*ThesefindingscamefromaprojectsupportedbytheUKEconomicandSocialResearchCouncil(ESRC)involvingdetailedanalysesof144lessonsby72teachersin48Englishprimaryschools(http://tinyurl.com/ESRCdialogue).


8

2)Self-audit:Howproductiveisthedialogueinmyclassroom?Youmaywanttobeginbyconductingaself-audit.Bearinmindthatsometimesweunderstandauditstatementsdifferently.Forexample,agroundrule,suchas‘wealltrustandlistentoeachother’,carriesdifferentlayersofmeaningrelatingtothefollowingelements*:

● fosteringinterpersonalrelationships● hearingeveryone’sideas● learningfromeachother’sthinking

Thisself-auditcanbeausefultoolforreflectiontofocusyourinquiryandtomonitorwhathappensasyougoalong.Itcanbehelpfultorepeatit.Inlookingateachself-audititemyoumayaskyourself:WhatdothesemeaninmypracticeandhowdoIknowtheyareactuallyhappening?YourthoughtsaboutthiscanfeedintoyourReflectiveCycleofInquiry(seepage10andSection3)* This distinction between the three different layers and elements of classroom dialoguewas highlighted in a large-scalemixedmethods intervention study onclassroomdialogueinteachingscienceandmathematics(www.educ.cam.ac.uk/research/projects/episteme/).

As a first step, consider: what is your general impression of whether these three elements of dialogue are in balance in yourclassroom?Isoneemphasisedmorethanothers?Secondly,gointomoredetailbyusingtheself-audittable(page8)andratingthepointsthatapplytoyourclassroomas:(1)rarely(2)sometimes(3)usuallyFinally,lookbackatthethreeelementsaboveandconsiderwhethertheyneedrebalancing,andwhy?


9

Self-Audit:Supportingdevelopmentofdialogueintheclassroom Reflectonlearningandteachinginyourclassroomandrateeachstatementusing:(1)rarely(2)sometimes(3)usually

Inmyteaching,doI…? Myrating

Inourclassroom,dowe…? Myrating

● valuestudenttalkinmylessonsandplanforittotakeplaceingroupsandwhole-classsituations

● ensurethateveryoneparticipatessometimesinclassroomdialogue,includingmyself

● takeaccountofchildren’sindividualneedsandinterestswhendevelopingdialogue

● encouragechildrentoberesponsiblefortheirownlearning(individuallyandcollectively)

● invitechildrentoelaborateandbuildontheirownandothers’ideas● invitechildrentogiveareasonfortheirideasandopinions● invitechildrentoaskeachotherquestionsabouttheirideas● supportchildreninarangeofwaystoenablethemtosharetheirideas,views

andfeelings● buildonchildren’scontributionstoadvancethedialogueusingmyown

subjectknowledgeandunderstanding● takerisksandexperimentbytryingoutnewdialogicteachingapproaches● listentostudents,givefeedbackandrespondinaconstructiveway● useclassroomresources,includingtechnology,indialogicwaystohelp

childrenintheirlearning

● createaninclusiveclassroomconversation

● trustandlistentoeachother● expressarangeofviews● challengeeachotherrespectfully● explainourreasoningclearly● havethewillingnesstosometimes

changeourminds● sometimescometoagreement● helpeachothertounderstandthingsin

anewway● buildnewknowledgetogether● extendandrefinewhatwealready

know● continueadialogueovertime,from

lessontolesson● realisewhatwestillneedorwantto

learnandhowwemightliketodoit


10

3)Reflectiveinquiryandteaching

TheapproachesoutlinedintheT-SEDApackaregroundedinthebeliefthatreflectiveinquiryliesattheheartofteaching.Thiscaninvolveindividualself-reflection as well as collaborative professional development between teacher colleagues. Students are also part of this process andmay beencouragedtodiscusstheirownclassroomcommunicationandlearning.T-SEDAisparticularlysuitedtosituationswhenteachershaveidentifiedaparticularinterestinorconcernaboutclassroomtalkandlearning.Focusing‘inquiryquestions’andconductingashortclassroominvestigationcanhelpyoutargetattention,sharpenawarenessandbuildunderstandingofwhatis actuallyhappening in the fast-paced classroomsetting.Reflectingonobservational evidenceand furtherdiscussionwith colleagues can supportsubsequentdecisionmakingaboutsettingprioritiesforyourclassroomanddecidingwhetherandhowtointervene.This inquiryprocessresemblesschool-based action research, in which knowledge and understanding are developed through iterative cycles of planning, classroom trialling,observation,evaluation,andreflectionandmodification.Thiscycleshouldconnectwellwithotherprofessionalpracticesandapproachestoactionresearchthatyouarealreadyfamiliarwith.

The Reflective Cycle of Inquiry is intended to represent how the use of the T-SEDAmaterialsmay help you solve problems, building furtherunderstandingandgenerallyfollowingupyourinterestsinclassroomdialogue.AfullerversionofquestionstoaskateachpointcanbefoundlaterintheT-SEDApack(Section3).


11

ReflectiveCycleofInquiry:focusingoneducationaldialogue


12

4)Analysingclassroomtalk:systematicobservationandcodingToeffectivelyunderstandwhatishappeninginanytalksituation,ithelpstobreakdownindividualcontributionsandconsiderwhatfunctionstheyserve.Acodingschemecanbeaninvaluablewayofunderstandingrealexamplesofclassroominteractionsanddialogue.Thisprofessionaldevelopmentpackhasbeendevelopedfromresearchoneffectivelycodingclassroomtalktolookforevidenceof‘dialogicmoves’(seeSection2).

Systematiccoding:whatisit?Howdoweknowhighqualityclassroomdialoguewhenweseeit?Howcanwebesureourimpressionsaregroundedinactualinstancesofproductiveformsofinteraction?Acommonwaytotacklethisistocategoriseinteractionsystematically,or‘code’it,chunkbychunk,oftencodingeachspeaker’sturnseparately.Thismeanslookingatthefunctionsofeachcontributiontotheconversationmadebyteachersandstudents(e.g.invitingsomeonetoofferanopinion;askingaquestion;orstatingapoint).Researchersmaydeveloptheirownsetofcategories(scheme)forthisanalysis,ortheymayre-useoradaptone.Thentheysystematicallyapplytheschemeacrossalessonorparticularepisodestoseewhatfeaturesoftheinteractionarecommonlyoccurring.Lessonsmightbecodedlive,fromvideooraudiorecordings,orfromtranscriptsofthoserecordings(seeguidanceandexamplesinSections5and6).

Systematiccoding:whyuseit?Somebenefitsofcoding:

• Codingshowsupwhatthecasualobservermightnoteasilysee,especiallypatternsemergingacrosslessonsorepisodes;forexamplewhoisparticipatingmoreoftenandinmoredepth?

• Lotsoflessondatacanbehandledandboileddowntoshowthefrequenciesofkeycharacteristicsofthedialogue• Change(e.g.inteacherpractice,studentparticipationorlearning)canbechartedovertimeorstudentgroups/lessons/classroomscanbe

comparedusingaconsistentmeasure


13

Systematiccoding:whatwillIneedtobecarefulabout?Codingalsohasitslimitations:

• Meaningsandintentionscanbeambiguousandcategoriesmaynotbestraightforwardtoapply• Codingtreatsturnsseparatelyandoutofcontext,sothattheoriginaltalkbecomesnolongervisible;itignoreshowcodesworkin

combinationandhowoneperson’scommunicationsinfluencethosefollowing(e.g.howarequestionsandsuggestionstakenupinthedialogue?Arestudentcontributionsself-initiatedorpromptedbyteachersand/orpeers?Aresomeopen-endedquestionsfailingtostimulatestudentstogiveelaboratedresponses?

• Codingthustellsuslittleabouttheunderlyingdynamicoflearninginthatclassroomandtheinstructionalstanceofateacher–howdialogicormonologicitis

• Startingwithcertaincategoriescanlimitobservationofotherformsofinteraction

Whatcanwedoabouttheselimitationsofcoding?Wecanseekrigourandusecomplementarymethodsinordertostrengthentheapproach…

● Forexample,tocaptureasupportiveclassroomclimatefordialogue-anethosofmutualtrustandrespect-requiresamuchbroader-grainedmeasurethancodingconversationalturns.Inourrecentlarge-scaleprojectweratedthestudentparticipationlevelacrosseachwholelessonusingasimple3-pointratingscale(seeSection2).

● Wecanexplorehowadialogueprogressesovertime(duringoracrosslessons)throughreadingitcarefullyandinterpretingtheinteractionsin

lightofthecodingpatternemerging.Thenwecanwriteanarrativeaboutthese,takingaccountofdifferentfactors,suchas:

○ howparticipantsstimulatefurthercontributionsbyothers○ significantfeaturesofthecontextincludingpedagogicalobjectivesandstrategies


14

5)UsesoftheT-SEDApackThis pack aims to provide guidance for teacherswhowish to identify and fostermore dialogic interactions in thewhole class setting or betweenstudentsworkingingroups.Itisforprimary(elementary)andsecondaryschoolpractitionerstouseinanysubjectareaforprofessionaldevelopmentorasaresearchinstrument. Itmayalsobeusefulforstudentstomonitortheirownparticipationindialogue,anditcouldbeextendedtoapplytootherdialoguesinschools,suchasteachermeetings.Youcanadaptthematerialstothespecificneedsofyourownsettingandstudents.Youmightusethepackindifferentways,accordingtopurposeandopportunity.Teachers,otheradults(e.g.teachingassistants)andstudentscoulduseT-SEDAasatoolforself-reflectionandforobservationofpeers.Students'useofT-SEDAmayinmostcasesbeinitiatedandguidedbytheteacher,althoughtheteachermaynotbephysicallypresentoneveryoccasion.Specificdialoguecategories(seeSection2)canbechosenaccordingtoinquiryaims,interestsandneeds.

6)Theimportanceofclassroomdialogue–furtherinsightsfromresearchHereweexpandbrieflyonsomeofthepointssummarisedabove.Keyresearchreferencesareprovidedattheendofthepack.

There is an emerging consensus among researchers about the forms of classroom interaction that are productive for student learning. Inparticular,talkhasbeenhighlightedasthemaintoolthatteachersandstudentscanusetothinktogether.Usingwordswecandothingswithothers:wecaninvite,coordinateandquestion,aswellasdismissorhurt.Thus,notallformsoftalkareequallypowerfulforlearning,andby‘dialogue’wedon’tjustmeananykindoftalk.Indialogue,participantslistentoeachother,theycontributebysharingtheirideas,justifyingtheir contributions andengagingwith others’ views. In particular theyexplore and evaluatedifferent perspectivesand reasons. Purposefulquestionsandcontributionsare linked incumulativeknowledgebuilding thatcanhappen ina lessonor inseriesof interconnected lessons.Although verbal interactions are central, dialogue can be supported using visual or technology resources. Silence, physical movement,classroomroutinesandethoscanalsobeimportantaspectsofdialogue,framingthespokenconversationthatisthemainfocusofthispack.Educationaldialoguetakesdifferentformswithstudentsofdifferentages,fromtheyoungesttooldest,anditcanbedevelopedindifferentareasoflearning.Somefeaturesofproductiveeducationaldialoguealreadyappearinmanyclassroomsandtheycanbepromotedby


15

deliberate questioning, practising and continuously reflecting on how talk is being used to learn. But engaging in productive educationaldialogue takes time and itmight challenge participants, especially if they are not used to expressing their views at length or having themexaminedpublicly.Thisiswhyitishelpfultoestablish‘groundrules’fordialogue.Someideasforimportantgroundrulesareindicatedintheself-audit(page8),butitisusuallyagoodideatodiscussthesewithstudentsandcreateabespokelistofgroundrulesthatisunderstoodandownedbyeachclass.Followingthisconceptionofdialogue,thecodingschemeintheT-SEDApackpresentsamenuof‘talkmoves’,plusfeaturesofamoregeneralclassroomethos that supportproductivedialogue.Thispackhighlights thoseelementsofdialogue thathavebeenshown inour large-scaleresearchtobestronglyrelatedtostudentlearninggainsinEnglishandmathematicsandattitudestoschoolandself-as-learner.Thedatacamefromdetailedanalysesof144lessonsby72teachersin48Englishprimaryschools(http://tinyurl.com/ESRCdialogue).Themain conclusion is that developing a supportive classroom ethos,with active participation ideally supported by talk rules in place,providesthefoundationfordialogueto flourish; then,specificmoves,especially thoserelatingtoelaboratingandbuildingon ideas,andquestioningandchallengingothers’ideas,arelinkedtolearning.Studentelaborationseemstobeparticularlyimportant.

Which talk moves are strongly associated with learning gains? • elaborating and building on ideas • invitations to elaborate and build on ideas • querying – respectfully challenging and questioning others’ views

Which are the most supportive elements of dialogue at the classroom level? • active student participation – multiple students give extended contributions and engage with others’ ideas • explicit use of talk rules – ground rules supporting target dialogic practices, negotiated with students

These features of productive dialogue need to occur together to have a significant impact on learning. Too much querying without the other supportive elements can even have a negative effect!


16

These findings describe the quality of both teacher and student talk,which go hand in hand.We know that if teachers invite students toelaboratemore,forexample,thenstudentsdoso.‘Elaboration’–includinginvitationsandcontributions-isverystronglylinkedwithpositiveattitudestoschoolandtoself-as-learnertoo.

Insum,dialoguepromoteslearningacrossthecurriculum,thedevelopmentofreasoningskillsandcommunicationskills,andmorefavourableattitudestoschoolandlearning.Also,itenhancesstudents’roleinlearning,boostingownershipandengagement.Ourownstudyshowedthatveryfewteachers(lessthan20%)introducedorreferredtotalkrules/groundrulesforeffectiveinteractionandlearningwithothers.

• Whentalkruleswereevident,thiswaslinkedtomorepositivestudentattitudestoschool.• Whenuseoftalkruleswascombinedwithalotofelaboration,thiswaslinkedtosignificantlybetterresultsinmathematics.• Whereitwascombinedwithquerying,itenhancedreasoningskills.• In small group work where students participate equitably and work well together on their own, their academic attainment in

mathematicsandEnglish(spellingandgrammar)improves.Thesefindingsmostlyconcerndialogueincontextswheretheteacherwaspresent(interactingwithclass,grouporindividual).Werecognisethateffectiveteachingcontainsawiderepertoireofdifferentstrategiesthatareusedappropriatelyanddialogueisonlyoneofthose;notallclassroominteractionswill(norshould)bedialogic.However,researchshowsthatdialogicteachingisrareinmanyclassrooms,andthereareopportunitiesacrossthecurriculumtodevelopdialogiclearningandteaching.


17

7)Keepingeducationalgoalsinmind:workingwithteacherstodevelopT-SEDATheteamthatisdevelopingT-SEDAincludespractisingteacherswhoareinvolvedintriallingthematerialsintheirschools.Itishopedthatdevelopingandusing T-SEDAwill support sharing of alternativeways of collecting evidence about the nature andoutcomesof classroomdialogue. Thismayinclude its potential uses formany educational purposes, including the development of knowledge and understanding across the curriculum, theenhancementofclassroomrelationshipsandequity,andtheassessmentof,andfor,studentoracyandlearning.Teachersinseveralcountriesandworkingwithdifferentagegroupshavenowtriedoutthepackandtheirfeedbackhashelpedtorefineit.Furtherfeedback,classroomexamplesandsuggestionsfromanyteachersinterestedintryingoutthematerialsaregreatlywelcomed(Contactusat:[email protected])AnexamplefrompracticeT-SEDAisintendedtohelpinbridgingresearchandpractice.Forexample,theself-audittool(page8)hasbeenadaptedfromthe‘dialoguetable’onthenextpage,whichconciselysummarisesoneteacher’sviewaboutwhathappensinadialogicclassroomandwhatdialogicactivitycouldleadto.ItwasauthoredbyDianeRawlins,oneofourteacherco-researchersinCambridge.*ThefirstandsecondcolumnsinDiane’stablearereflectedintheself-audittoolgivenearlier.Butwhataboutthethirdcolumn,omittedfromtheself-audit,thatshowsthegoals–i.e.whatdialogicactivitycouldleadto.DoesyourownperspectiveonthegoalsofdialoguematchDiane’s?*Derived from work carried out as part of an Economic and Social Research Council Fellowship (grant no. RES063270081).

Couldyouaddyourownthirdcolumntotheself-audittool(page8),showingwhatyourowneducationalpurposesare?-Istheethosinyourclassroomsupportiveofdialogue?Whendoesitapproachtheideal?-Whatareyourwiderlong-termpurposes?-Howwillenhancingthedialogueinyourclassroomalsohelptoachieveyourwidergoals?


18

Diane’stable:Supportingdevelopmentofdialogueintheclassroom

Inmyclassroom,we… Youwillseeus… Sothatwecan…

• respect,trustandlistentoeachother

• ensurethateveryoneparticipatessometimes

• takerisksandexperimentbytryingoutnewteachingapproaches

• encouragechildrentoberesponsiblefortheirownlearning

• usegoodsubjectknowledgeandawarenessofourchildren’sneedstohelpususechildren’scontributionstoadvancethedialoguetakingplace

• supportchildreninarangeofwaystoenablethemtosharetheirviewsandideas

• inviteotherstoelaborateandbuildontheirownandothers’ideas

• valuetalkinourlessonsandplanforittotakeplace

• arewillingtosometimeschangeourminds

• continueadialogueovertime,fromlessontolesson

• sharing,comparing,discussing,commentingonandexploringdifferentviewsandideas

• askingeachotherquestionsandqueryingtheanswerssometimes

• showingthatweconsiderotherpeople’sviews

• sometimestryingtoreachasharedunderstandingbyelaboratingandbuildingonwhatpeoplesay

• givingfeedbackandrespondinginahelpfulway;beinga‘criticalfriend’

• givingextendedcontributions,notjustshortones

• usingwhatwealreadyknowtohelpus

• reasoningandthinkingaloud

• tellingeachotherwhatwehavelearntwhenwehavebeenthinkingbyourselves

• usingclassroomresources,includingtechnology,indifferentwaystohelpusinourlearning

• sayingwhyweagreeordisagreewithanidea

• createaninclusivelearningenvironment

• realisewhatwestillneedorwanttolearnandhowwemightliketodoit

• extendandrefinewhatwealreadyknow

• explainourreasoningclearly

• helpeachothertounderstandthingsinanewway

• cometoagreement

• expressarangeofviews

• buildnewknowledgetogether


19

Supportingthedevelopmentofdialogueinmyclassroom

Inmyclassroom,we…

Youwillseeus….

Sothatwecan,,,,

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•


20

SECTION2:Codingframework TheT-SEDAcodingframeworkcomprisestwoparts.Thefirstonefocusesonturn-by-turnanalysisofdialogue,andthesecondonecapturesdialogicpracticesacrossawholelessonorepisode.

a. Codingcategoriesforturn-by-turnanalysis

Thecategoriesbelowcanbeusedtoanalysetalkturnsinordertounderstandthefunctionsofeachcontributiontothedialogue.Sometimes,morethan one code can occurwithin a turn or even a sentence. Guidance about how the framework can be used follows in the next sections of thisresource.This frameworkhasbeenadapted fromtheCam-UNAMSchemeforEducationalDialogueAnalysis (SEDA)1collaborativelydevelopedandtestedbytwolargeresearchteamsinMexicoandUK(asdescribedbyHennessyetal.2016).

Keydialoguecategories

CODINGCATEGORIES CONTRIBUTIONSANDSTRATEGIES Whatdowehear?

IEL–InviteelaborationInviteelaboration,buildingonorclarifyingownorothers’ideas

● invitetoelaborateorbuildon

ownorothers’ideas● invitetoclarifyacontribution● invitetoagree/disagree,

compareorevaluateothers’ideasorviews

PossibleKeyWordstolookfor:‘What?’‘Tellme’,‘Canyourephrasethis?’‘Doyouthink?’‘Doyouagree?’Examples:Whatdoyoumean?Tellmemore…Cananyoneaddtothat?Canyougiveanexampleofwhatyousaid?IsyourideasimilartoManuel’s?WhatdoyouthinkaboutMaria’sidea?DoyouagreewithwhatChrisjustsaid?

1SEDA(©2015;pronounced“Sedda”asinSpanish)wasdevelopedbyaresearchteamfromtheUniversityofCambridge,UK,andtheNationalAutonomousUniversityofMexico,ledbySaraHennessyandSylviaRojas-Drummond.The3-yearprojectwasfundedthroughtheBritishAcademyInternationalPartnershipandMobilityScheme.TheoriginalSEDAhas33codingcategoriesorganisedin8clusters.Ithasbeencondensedandreformulatedtocreatenewformsoftheschemefordifferentresearchpurposes(e.g.theESRC-fundedclassroomdialogueproject:http://tinyurl.com/ESRCdialogue).ThefulloriginalSEDAschemeandfurtherinformationabouttheresearchareavailableathttp://tinyurl.com/BAdialogue.

So,howcantheT-SEDAcodingframeworkhelpmetoevaluatethequalityofdialogueinmyclassroom?


21

CODINGCATEGORIES CONTRIBUTIONSANDSTRATEGIES

Whatdowehear?

EL–ElaborateideasElaborate,buildonorclarifyownorothers’ideas

● buildonownoranother’sideas

byaddingsomethingnew● clarify,elaborate,extend,

reformulateownoranother’sideas

● evaluatepreviousideas

PossibleKeyWordstolookfor:‘it’salso’,‘thatmakesmethink’,‘Imean’Examples:Kate’sideamademethinkaboutwhythecharacterwoulddothat.

I’vegotanideathatno-onehasmentionedyet…

WhatImeantearlierwas…

MyideawassimilartoJose,Iwrotethatflowerswouldmakethebestpresent

Q–QueryingQuestioning,disagreeingwithorchallenginganidea

● Statingfullorpartial

disagreement● Doubtinganidea● Challenginganidea● Rejectinganidea● Indicatingthattwoormore

ideasthathavebeenexpressedareindisagreement

PossibleKeyWordstolookfor:‘Idisagree’,‘No’,‘But’,‘Areyousure…?’Examples:I’mnotsureitwillfloatactuallyIdon’tthinkthat’sright,Ithink....Areyousuretheseanglesarethesame?Butthenthatwouldn’thappenif…That’spartiallytrue,butnotwhen…Idon’tagreewiththatatallIt’snotVictorianLondonthoughNo,Ithinkthatotherone


22

Somefurthercategoriestoconsider


IRE–InvitereasoningInviteotherstoexplain,justify,and/orusepossibilitythinkingrelatingtotheirownoranother’sideas

● invitetoexplain,justify,drawon

evidence,makeanalogies,makedistinctions

● invitetopredict,hypothesise● invitetospeculate,exploredifferent

possibilities

PossibleKeyWordstolookfor:‘Why?’,‘How?,‘Doyouthink?’Examples:Howdidyouarriveatthatsolution?Whatwould/could/mighthappenif...?Canyouimaginethat…?Whichobjectsdoyouthinkmightfloat?Whydoyouthinkthatwas?(inrelationtoastatement/observation)Whydoyouthinkthatwouldbe?(inrelationtoastatement/observation)Howdoyouknowthat?Chloesaysxis2.Howdoweknowthatshe’scorrect?WhocantellmewhytheymightagreewithJoe?

R–MakereasoningexplicitExplain,justifyand/orusepossibilitythinkingrelatingtoownoranother’sideas

● explain,justify,drawonevidence,

makeanalogies,makedistinctions● predict,hypothesise● speculate,exploredifferent

possibilities

PossibleKeyWordstolookfor:‘Ithink’,‘because’,‘so’,‘therefore’,‘thus,’‘inorderto’,‘if...then’,‘not...unless’,‘it’slike...’,‘imagineif...’,‘would’,‘could’or‘might’

Examples:Ithinkthewoodwillfloatbutnotthemetal.Theicecapsmeltingby10%supportstheglobalwarmingtheory.Ifchildrendon’thavetogotoschooltheywouldn’tlearnmathsproperly.IfIchosethefirstalternativeIwouldbesafer,butifIchoosethesecondoneIcouldeventuallyhavegreatergains.Ithinktheauthormightbereferringtofeelingswhenhewritesaboutwater.


23


CA-CoordinationofideasandagreementContrastandsynthesiseideas,expressagreementandconsensus

● agreeexplicitlywithanideaoraview● evaluatedifferentideasby

comparing/contrasting/critiquingthem

● judgethevalueofanidea/artefact● explicitlyacknowledgeashiftof

position● proposetoresolvedifferencesand/or

agreeasolution● synthesise,generalise

PossibleKeyWordstolookfor:‘Iagree’,‘Ichangedmymind’,‘tosumup…’,‘So,weallthinkthat…’Examples:IagreewithX…because…Yes,Lucyisrightbecause...ElainecameupwithmoreevidencethanTim,shewasmoreconvincing.Ithinkweagreethatasuspensionbridgewouldworkbest.

Iseewhatyoumean,OptionCisprobablyright,notB.

Theyarebothsayingthesamethingbecause…

RD–ReflectondialogueoractivityEvaluateandreflect“metacognitively”onlearningactivity

● talkabouttalkorprocessesof

dialogue● invitetalkabouttalkorprocessesof

dialogue● reflectonpurposes/processes/

value/outcomeoflearningactivity● invitetoreflectonpurposes/

processes/value/outcomeoflearningactivity

PossibleKeyWordstolookfor:‘dialogue’,‘talking’,‘sharing’,‘collaborating’,‘groupwork’,‘pairwork’,‘task’,‘activity’Examples:Ilikesharingideasbecauseitcangiveusnewideasforourwriting.They(talkingandlistening)kindofgotogether,don’tthey?It(dialogue)workswheneveryoneistalkingabouttherightthingSo,thinkingaboutourgroundrulesfortalkingintheclassroom...Inyourgroupcanyouthinkaboutwhatmakesdialoguework?Icanseeyouwerelisteningtoeachothercarefully.

Whatchangedyourmind,andwhy?

Howdidyoufeelaboutbeingina‘note-taker’roleinyourgrouptoday?


24

CODINGCATEGORIES CONTRIBUTIONSANDSTRATEGIES Whatdowehear? C–ConnectMakepathwayoflearningexplicitbylinkingtocontributions/knowledge/experiencesbeyondtheimmediatedialogue

● referbacktoearliercontributionsor

flagupforthcomingrequests● referforwardorbacktorelevant

activityorartefactsrefertowidercontextsbeyondtheclassroomortopriorknowledge/experiences

PossibleKeyWordstolookfor:‘lastlesson,‘earlier’,‘remindsmeof’,‘nextlesson’Examples:It’slikewhenwedid/learnt…Whorememberstheexperimentwedidwithkeepingplantsinthedark?AttheendofthelessonI'mgoingtoaskyoutowritedownwhatyouthinkhappenedandwhy.Whohasvisitedthesciencemuseumandcantelluswhatthey’veseen?IknowalotabouthorseridingbecauseIhavemyownhorse.Doyouthinkyoumightfindsimilarcreaturesinthesoilinyourowngarden?Haveyouseenanythingonthenewsthatreferstoweatherorclimate?

G–GuidedirectionofdialogueoractivityTakeresponsibilityforshapingactivityorfocusingthedialogueinadesireddirectionoruseotherscaffoldingstrategiestosupportdialogueorlearning(Thisgeneralcategorycapturescontributionsthatsupporttheflowofdialogueandmayenhancestudentparticipation)

● encouragestudent-studentdialogue● offerthinkingtime● proposepossiblecoursesofactionor

inquiryusestrategiesthatrespondtolearners’levelsofunderstandingsuchas:provideinformativefeedback,feedin/highlightideas,focusattentiononkeyconceptsortaskelements,stimulatewider/deeperthinking,introduceauthoritativeperspective,e.g.technicaltermsorfactstoclarifyconfusedthinking

PossibleKeyWordstolookfor:‘Howabout’,‘focus’,‘concentrateon’,‘Let’stry’,‘nohurry’Examples:So,inanswertothequestion,whathaveyoufoundout?Areyouthinkingabout...?Don’tworry,haveago...Let’stryaddingupinstead!Takeyourtimeandletmeknowwhenyou’vethoughtofanything.Whydon’tyouexplaintoKellywhatwearedoing?Inpairscanyoudiscusswhichofthesesourcesyouthinkisthemostreliableaccountofthebattle?WhatwouldNewtonsay?Trytomakemoreeyecontactsoyoucanengagetheaudiencemore.


25


E–ExpressorinviteideasOfferorinviterelevantcontributionstoinitiateorfurtheradialogue(onesnotcoveredbyothercategories)

● inviteopinions,ideas,beliefsorexampleswithoutreferringbackorelaboratingandbuildingonpriorcontributions,typicallybyopen,generalquestions,orbydrawingmorepeopleintotheexchangewithoutexplicitlyinvitingthemtobuild/reason/coordinate/query

● makearelevantcontribution,includingshortresponsestoclosedquestions;plenaryfeedback;relevantideasnotexplicitlylinkedtopreviouscontributions

PossibleKeyWordstolookfor:‘Whatdoyouthinkabout…?’,‘Tellme’,‘yourthoughts’,‘youropinion’,‘yourideas’Examples:Whatdoyouthink,Maria?Whatdoyouthinkisreallyimportantinthistext?Canyouidentifysomekeywordsandunderlinethemontheboard?Arethereanymoreideasonthat?Howmanyfour-leggedanimalscanyouname?Whatdoyouknowabouthowelectricityworks?Let’sbrainstorm…

b. Dialogicpracticesacrossawholelessonorepisode

Thefollowingpracticeshavebeenidentifiedasparticularlysignificantforstudentlearning:talkrulesandstudentparticipation.

TalkrulesStudentsoftenfindithardtotalkandworkwelltogether.Theyneedtobetaughthowtodothiseffectively.Thismeansfollowingasetofexplicitgroundrulesandusingthebestonesforthetask.Groundrules–or"talkrules"–areideallyconstructedbyateacherandtheclasstogetherratherthanimposed.Herearesomeexamples:

WelistentoeachothercarefullyanddonotinterruptWeshareallourideaWeaskeachother'Whatdoyouthink?'and'Why?'WethinkaboutwhatwehearWesayasmuchaswecan,takingturnsandfollowingon

Asetoflessonplansforsettinguptalkrules/groundrulescanbefoundat:https://thinkingtogether.educ.cam.ac.uk/resources/


26

StudentparticipationTalkrulessupportactivestudentparticipation,whichinvolvesmultiplestudentsgivingextendedcontributionsandengagingwithothers’ideas.Thistabledescribeslevelsofteacherdirectionandstudentinvolvementinkeyaspectsofdialogicpractices.Thiscanbeusedasaratingscaleforanepisodesorwholelesson(seeSection6formoredetails).

DialogicPractice Notevident Teacher-led Teacher-ledwithstudentinvolvement

Talkrules Noexplicitfocusongroundrulesfordialogueordialogicpracticesisapparent

Theteacherintroduces,modelsorremindsstudentsoftargetdialogicpractices,e.g.groundrulestobefollowed,inclusiveturntaking.

Teacherandstudentsorstudentsthemselvesnegotiatetargetdialogicpractices,e.g.groundrules,perhapsalongwithreminders/modelling.

Itmayalsoincludestudentsbeinggivenortakingresponsibilityformanagingthedialogue,aswellasstudentsbeinginvolvedinevaluatingeffectivenessofdialogicpractices.

Student

participationPublicexchangesinwhole-classsituationorgroupworkconsistinteacherquestioningandsuccinctstudents'contributions

or

Studentsdon'thaveopportunitiestodiscusstheirideaspublicly

Studentsexpresstheirideaspubliclyatlengthinwhole-classsituationandgroupwork,buttheydon'tengagewitheachother’sideas

Multiplestudentsexpresstheirideaspubliclyatlengthinwhole-classsituationandgroupwork

AND

Indoingso,theyengagewitheachother’sideas,forexamplebyreferringbacktotheircontributions,challengingorelaboratingonthem(e.g.‘It’sabitlikewhatShootlesaidbut….’,‘Samhadsuchagreatidea,look[demonstrates]’).Thisincludesspontaneousorteacher-promptedparticipation.


27

Developingdialogicpractice&

Identifyingaims,interestsandinquiryfocus


28

SECTION3:Developingdialogicpractice

TheapproachesoutlinedintheT-SEDApackaregroundedinthebeliefthatreflectiveinquiryliesattheheartofteaching.Thiscaninvolveindividualself-reflection as well as collaborative professional development between teacher colleagues. Students are also part of this process andmay beencouragedtodiscusstheirownclassroomcommunicationandlearning.TheT-SEDAisparticularlysuitedtosituationswhenteachershaveidentifiedaparticularinterestinorconcernaboutclassroomtalkandlearning.Focusing‘inquiryquestions’andconductingashortclassroominvestigationcanhelptotargetattention,sharpenawarenessandbuildunderstandingofwhatisactuallyhappeninginthefast-pacedclassroomsetting.Reflectingonobservationalevidenceandfurtherdiscussionwithcolleaguessupportssubsequentdecisionmakingaboutsettingprioritiesanddecidingwhetherandhow to intervene. This inquiry process resembles school-based action research, in which knowledge and understanding are developed throughiterativecyclesofplanning,classroomtrialling,observation,evaluation,andreflectionandmodification.The reflectivecycleof inquiryon thenextpage is intendedto representhowuseof theT-SEDAmaterialsmaycontribute tosolvingproblems,buildingknowledgeandgenerallyfollowingupinterestsinclassroomdialogue:AblankformofthereflectivecycleisincludedinAppendix1fordevelopingyourowncycle.Acompletedreflectivecyclecanbeaneffectivewayofsharinginvestigationfindingswithcolleagues.


29

ReflectiveCycleofInquiry:focusingoneducationaldialogue


30

SECTION4:Identifyingaims,interestsandinquiryfocusTeachers, other adults (e.g. teaching assistants) and students themselvesmight use the T-SEDA pack in differentways, according to purpose andopportunity.Possibilitiesinclude

• videoingownlessonandanalysingownteachingtoauditcurrentpractice,orchartchangeovertime(seeSection5)• observingteachercolleaguesandgivingfeedback(seetablebelowandSection3)• analysingstudents’collaborationorreasoningskillsandsupportingtheirdevelopment(seetablebelowandSection3)• self-assessmentofteacherdiscussions(e.g.during‘lessonstudy’conversations)(seetablebelowandSection3)• engaginginschool-basedenquiryandinwiderresearchnetworkswithschool/universitycolleagues(seetablebelowandSection3)

TeacherswhohaveworkedwithT-SEDAhaveinquiredintodifferentaspectsofdialogue.Areasofinterestinclude:

● students’reasoninginsecondaryschoolhistoricalinvestigation;● younglearners’grouprolesin‘thinkingtogether’activities;● students’equitableparticipationinprimarysciencegroupwork;● teachers’‘lessonstudy’discussions;● teachers’peerlessonobservationsandprofessionaldevelopment

Onewaytoconsidertherangeofpossibilitiescanbeseeninthetablebelow ,withsomeexamplesofgeneralinquiryquestionsthathighlightthecoreelementsof‘Elaboratingandbuildingon’and‘Queryingandchallenging’inthecontextofactiveparticipationandtalkrules.


31

INQUIRYTYPE SAMPLEPURPOSEFORINQUIRY SAMPLEFOCUS&INQUIRYQUESTIONS

Observationofotherteachers

Toseeiftalkrulestopromotedialogueareinplace

ToidentifyhowstudentsaresupportedtoelaborateandbuildonideasToseehowtheteacherhelpsstudentstoengageproductivelyinqueryingToseewhetherthereisasupportiveatmospherefortriallingandevaluatingideas

Aretalkrulesnegotiatedduringthelesson?Ifnot,aretalkrulesmentioned?(Talkrules)

Dostudentsandtheteacherappeartoobservetalkrulesorroutinesthatbenefitdialogue?(Talkrules)

Istheteacheraskinglearnerstoevaluate,elaborateorcommentonothers’positions?(IEL–Inviteelaboration)Dostudentsfeelcomfortableandconfidenttoexpress,queryandchallengeideas?(EL-ElaborateandQ-Querying)Dotheyneedamoresupportiveclassroomethos?Istheteacherdrawinginmorereticentstudents?(Studentparticipation)

Observationofstudents

Toinvestigateifstudentsareelaboratingandbuildingoneachother’sideas.

Toobservewhetherideasarebeingchallengedproductivelyandrespectfullybystudents

Togaugelevelsofactivestudentparticipation.

Toseeifanystudentsaremarginalisedorexcluded

Howarestudentsreactingtoinvitationstobuildoneachother’sideas?(EL–Elaborate)Dostudentsinviteotherstobuildonideas?(IEL–Inviteelaboration)Dostudentsrespectfullychallengeorquestionothers’ideas?(Q-Querying)Domultiplestudentsmakecontributionstodialogue?(EL–Elaborate)Dostudentsinitiateinteractionsandspeakdirectlytoeachotherwithoutalwaysaddressingtheteacher?(StudentParticipation)Whatare‘quietstudents’anddisengagedstudentsactuallydoingduringclassroomorgroupdiscussion?(StudentParticipation)


32

INQUIRYTYPE

SAMPLEPURPOSEFORINQUIRY SAMPLEFOCUS&INQUIRYQUESTIONS

Teacherself-reflection&professionaldevelopment

Toself-assesshowIamhelpingstudentstolearnthroughdialogue

ToexplorehowelaboratingandqueryingindialoguecanbesupportedToassesshowtalkrulesarebeingtakenupbytheclassandmyselfToidentifybarrierstodialogiclearningandteaching

DoIactivelybuildonlearners’ideas?(EL)

DoIexplicitlyencouragestudentstoexpressdisagreementsorchallenges?(Q)

DoIdrawinmorereticentstudents?(StudentParticipation)

Inwhichsubjectsandactivitiesdostudentsqueryorchallengeeachothermoreeasily?Howcouldthisbefurtherdeveloped?(Q)

Whichtalkrulesarebeingsuccessfullyimplemented?Arethereareasinwhichweneedtoimprove?

WhatstrategiescanIusetofindagoodbalancebetween‘elaborating’and‘querying’inwholeclassdialogue?

Students’selfreflection Forstudentstoinvestigatehowtheycanbetterengagewiththeirclassmates’ideas

Toassiststudentsinreflectingontheirparticipationinclassroomdialogue

Arewelisteningandtakingaccountofeachother'sideas?(EL)Dowedevelopwhatothershavesaid,insteadofjustwaitingtosaywhatwethink?(EL)Whenwedisagreewithsomeoneelse’spointofview,dowesayitrespectfully?(Q)Ifwedon’tdisagreewitheachotherpublicly,whydowethinkthisishappening?(Q)

Areourtalkrulesworkingwellfordifferentsubjectsandactivities?Areweallstickingtothem?

Other e.g.multi-professionalcaseconferenceor

teacherteammeeting/lessonstudydiscussion...


33

ChoosingyourfocusandinquiryquestionsMostinvestigationswillfocusinquiryquestionsonspecificelementsofdialogue,dependingontheparticularinterestorconcern.Wesuggestthatinquiriesthatfocusonclassroomdialogueandlearningcouldtakeaccountoftheresearchresultsthatpointtotheessentialcombinationoftheseelements:StudentParticipationandTalkRules,IEL(InviteElaboration)andEL(Elaboration),andQ(Querying).Formaximumbenefittolearning,allofthesewouldbeaddressed.Asastartingpoint,youmightselectone(ormore)element(s)forsystematicinquiry.Forexample:

• Ifthereisaconcernaboutequitableparticipationingroupwork,thenitcouldbeaprioritytofocusinquiryonencouragingqualitystudent-studentdialoguethroughintroducingTalkRulesandsupportingactiveStudentParticipation.

• Ifstudentsseemtobeconfidenttocontributeinclassbuttheyrarelybuildonothers’ideas,thenaninquirycouldtargetEL.• Theinquiryfocusmightcallforincludingothercodingcategories.Ifstudentshavebeenworkingonproblemsolvinginmathematicsthena

focusonthecategoriesQtogetherwithR(Reasoning)couldbedeveloped.Itislikely,also,thattheinquiryfocuswillchangeovertime.Thiscouldhappenbecauseinterestshiftsfromoneclassroomconcerntoanother,orperhapsbecauselearningobjectiveschange.Itcouldalsooccurbecausethereisasequencedlogictochoosingthecategoriesfordifferentphasesofinquiry.Forinstance,ateacherwhoisconcernedaboutthequalityofwhole-classdialogueinplenarysessionsmightstartwithaninquiryquestionfocusedontheoverallqualityofQ(Querying)evidentintheclassdiscussion,beforemovingontoinvestigatelevelsofindividualstudentparticipationinthiscontext.Dependingontheresults,thiscouldthenbefollowedbycloseobservationofhowstudentselaborateandbuildoneachother’sideas,howtheychallengeotherviewsandhowtheyconnecttheirlearningtowidercontextsbeyondthelesson.


34

ResearchEthicsTheT-SEDAprofessional learningpack is intendedtosupport teachers' reflective inquiry,withtheaimofenhancingclassroomdialogue. As inanyformofprofessionalactivitytherearesomegeneralethicalconsiderationsforusingT-SEDAtoinvestigatedialogueinschool.

Many schools and other educational organisations produce comprehensive ethical guidelines. For instance, educational researchers in Britain areexpected to abide by ethical guidelines issued by the British Educational Research Association (https://www.bera.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/BERA-Ethical-Guidelines-2011.pdf).

Thefollowingfiveprinciplesofresearchethics2havealongandimportanttraditionineducationalresearch,includingschool-basedinquiries:

•PrincipleOne:Minimisingtheriskofharmandmaximisingbenefits

•PrincipleTwo:Obtaininginformedconsent

•PrincipleThree:Protectinganonymityandconfidentiality

•PrincipleFour:Avoidingdeceptivepractices

•PrincipleFive:Providingtherighttowithdraw

Minimisingtheriskofharm

School-basedinvestigationcanhaveunintendedharmfulconsequences,suchas:

•Physicalharmordiscomforttoparticipants(studentsandstaff)

•Psychologicaldistressanddiscomfort

•Socialdisadvantage

•Lackofprivacyandanonymity

2 See article by Jim Parsons, University of Alberta: http://www.teacherresearch.ca/blog/article/2015/05/30/264-an-introductionreview-of-action-research-and-its-ethical-practices


35

Sotheriskofharmshouldbeminimised.Tominimisetheserisks,researcherscommonlyfindwaystofollowPrinciplesTwotoFiveabove,withregardtoinformedconsent,anonymityandconfidentiality,avoidingdeceptionandrighttowithdraw.TheseethicalconcernsalsoneedattentioninusingT-SEDA,althoughpracticaldecisionsabouthowtoproceeddependonthecircumstances.Forinstance,ifT-SEDAisbeingusedaspartofordinaryclassteachingthentheneed forstudents tosigna formalconsent form isunlikely.Theprofessionalprinciplesandresponsibilitiesofgoodteachingcannormallyleadtheway,butawarenessoftheseethicalprinciplescanhelpinrespondingtoanytensionsordilemmasthatmayariseinusingT-SEDAtoimprove learning and teaching in school. It is important to consider a rangeof classroomdynamics including issues of inclusion (e.g. for studentsidentifiedashavingspecialeducationalneedsanddisabilities),andotherrelevantsocialandculturalfactorsandpractices.

QuestionstoconsiderfortheethicaluseofT-SEDA

Asteachers,ourprimaryresponsibilityistoourstudents.T-SEDAinquiryisintendedtohaveapositiveeffectforstudentsandstaff,butitisimportantalsotojudgewhetheritsuseisnegativelyaffectingparticularlessons,meetingsorotheractivities.

ThefollowingquestionshavebeenadaptedfromZeni’s(1998,2001)3workandactasconsiderationsforself-reflection.Althoughmostdonotcallforspecificaction,theyarepointstoconsiderandtotalkthroughwithtrustedcolleagues.

1. Whatindividuals,groups,orcommunitiesdoyouplantoengageatthispointinyourT-SEDAstudy?Whataretheagesofthoseinvolved?Whyhaveyoumadethesedecisions?

2. HowmightexistingpowerrelationsandpoliticalinfluencesaffecttheT-SEDAinvestigation?Whoseviews(e.g.students,parents,colleagues,seniorleaders)couldbeinfluentialorunnoticedinthisrespect?

3 References Zeni, J. (1998) A guide to ethical issues and action research, Educational Action Research, 6(1), 9-19, DOI: 10.1080/09650799800200053 Zeni, J. (2001) A Guide to Ethical Decision Making for Insider Research (Epilogue), Ethical Issues in Practitioner Research, accessed from http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/309


36

3. Mightanynegativeorembarrassingdataemergefromyourinquiry?Mightanyonebeharmedpersonally?Whatprecautionscanyoutaketoprotectyourstudents?

4. Whatarethepossiblebenefitsofyourinquirytostudents,teachers,otherparticipants,ortotheprofession?

5. Howwillyouexplainyourinquiryprojecttoyourstudents,totheirparents,andtootherteachersandadministrationinyourschool?Whatdo

yourstudentsknowofthisproject?Whataretheriskstothemortheirfamiliesoftheirknowing(ornotknowing)whatyouwriteorcollect?Canyouexplainyourdecisions?

6. Howwillyouprotecttheprivacyandotherpersonalrightsofstudents,teachers,parents,andotherparticipants?Willyouusepseudonyms?

Whenyoushareyourfindings,whatmightyoudotoensureanonymityandconfidentiality?7. Wherewillyoustoreandcatalogueyourdataduringandafterthestudy?Whowillhaveaccesstoyourdata?Whatprecautionsshouldyou

takewithyournotesanddata?

8. What data should you credit to others?Might any of your data be considered the property of others? If so, how can you arrange withcolleaguesorparticipantsforcreditorrecognition?


37

Observationmethods

and

Templatesforobservingandcodingdialogue


38

SECTION5:ObservationmethodsincludingtechnicalguidanceforrecordingandtranscribingThis section aims to help teachers select an observationmethod appropriate for their purposes and situation by highlighting the advantages anddisadvantagesofdifferentmethods.Italsoofferssometechnicalguidanceforaudio/videorecording.

1. Observationmethods-potentialadvantagesanddisadvantagesTheinitialdevelopmentoftheT-SEDAmaterialsinvolvedatrialprocesswhichcomparedthefollowing:

A. Livecoding(i.e.simulated‘live’watchingavideoofclassroomgroupwork)

B. Audio-recording+selectivetranscribing(listeningtothesamevideo)

C. Video-recording+selectivetranscribing(watchingandlisteningtothesamevideo)

Asaresult,thefollowingadvantagesanddisadvantageswerenotedforeachmethod:

LIVECODING AUDIO-RECORDINGPLUSSELECTIVETRANSCRIBING

VIDEO-RECORDINGPLUSSELECTIVETRANSCRIBING

Advantages

● Visualrepresentation–beingabletoseebodylanguageaddstoourunderstandingofbothdialogueandclassroomrelationships,asdoesinteractionwithdigitalorphysicalartefacts/resources

● Levelofdetailoftranscriptallowsformoreprecisecoding,consideringclustersrelyonlanguage

● Allowsrevisitingpreviouscontributionstoidentifyconnections

● Levelofdetailoftranscriptallowsformoreprecisecoding,consideringclustersrelyonlanguage

● Allowsrevisitingpreviouscontributionstoidentifyconnections


39

● Inpracticaltermsthismethodcanbeusedmoreoftenthananyothermethod.

● Itdoesnotchangetheenvironmentforthestudentssoitcancapturenormalbehaviour.

● Allowspausingandthuscoderthinkingtime

● Allowsapplicationofmorecodes(evenalleightclusters)andrepeatediterationsifdesired.

● Facilitatesidentifyingopportunitiesforteacherintervention.

● Allowspausingandthuscoderthinkingtime

● Re-enactingclassroomconditionsandthusgivingamoreaccuraterepresentationofclassroomevents.

● Capturingnonverbalparticipationandphysicaldomination.

Disadvantages

● Speedofeventsmightleadtoinaccurateobservations/coding.

● Verydemandingandtiring(listeningcarefully,timing,thinkingandcoding).

● Onlyallowsfocusingonamaximumoftwodialogueclustersasamorerealisticoption.Thismightmissotherelementsofthediscussion.Likewisetimesamplingcanbydefinitionmisskeyevents.

● Notpossibletore-playandreflect.Difficulttoidentify‘elaboratingandbuildingon’withoutwrittenrecord;previousutterancescannotbeaccessed.

● Moretimeconsumingandthusnotverypracticalasaniterativemethodology.

● Lackofvisualobservationmeansthatteachershouldidentifyspeakersfromvoices.

● Missingnon-verbalparticipationorphysicaldomination.

● Notalwayspossibletotellifparticipantsarereadingout.

● Requiresmoreexpertiseandpracticetomasterandtoavoidattentionshiftingfromparticipationlevelstowardscontentandcollectiveflowofideas.

● Itmaytaketimeforstudentsandteacherstogetusedtobeingvideo-recorded,whichmeansthatinitialrecordingsmightnotcapturenormalbehaviour.

● Technicalequipmentneeded-oftennotavailableinschools.

● Moretimeconsumingandthusnotverypracticalasaniterativemethodology.


40

2.RecordingintheclassroomThereareseveralpossibilitiesforvideoandaudiorecording,dependingontheinquiryfocusandtheclassroomenvironment.Thefirstprincipleistouse a system that is ‘good enough’ for the purpose, and not over-complicated. Existing equipment could be sufficient, including tablets andsmartphones.Bewarned,however,thatrecordingequipmentwithoutanexternalmicrophoneislikelynottocapturegoodsoundqualityinanoisyenvironmentsodotestoutyourequipmentbeforehand.

Forvideorecording,consider:● tablet(withstand)● phone(withstand)● digitalcamera● camcorder● sportscameras● Apps(itisworthtriallingappsbeforeinvesting,forinstanceVideoEnhancedObservation(VEO)-freeversionallows5trialrecordings)● microphones(individual/tabletop)

Foraudiorecording,consider:● phone● digitalrecorder/dictaphone● tablet(someAppsofferfacilitytosyncnoteswithaudiorecordingtimecode)

● Interactivewhiteboards(orinteractivedisplaypanels):seeinstructionsforuseoftheSmartboardrecorderfacilityinAppendix2 ● microphones(individual/tabletop)


41

LocatingrecordingdevicesintheclassroomItislargelyamatteroftrialanderrortofindthebestlocationthat:

● givesadequatevideoandaudioquality● isnearapowersourceand/oraccessibletoreviewbatterylife● doesnotinterferewithotherclassroomactivities● capturestheeventsthataremostrelevanttotheinquiryfocus(wholeclassdialogue,peertalk,etc.)

GettinggoingClassroomrecordingismorecommonthaninpreviousyears,butthereisstillaneedtoconsiderthefollowing:

● atriallingperiod,beforeembarkingonthemaininvestigation● acclimatisationforstudentsandstaff

Ethicalconsiderations(seealsoSection4forgeneralethicalprinciples)It is essential to checkwhether students and staff have given consent to be recorded and, perhaps, for the recordings to be shared beyond theclassroom.Thefollowingshouldbeconsidered:

● Istherealreadyapolicyinplaceforvideoandaudiorecording?whatexactlydoesitcover?● Doindividualstudentsandstaffhaverightsnottoberecorded?● Willanypersonaldetailsneedtoberemovedforfutureuseofthevideooraudio?● Whatproceduresareinplaceforhandlingsensitiveorotherwisedifficultincidentsorsituations?● Howtoensurethatrecordingdoesnotinterfereharmfullywithlearningandteaching?


42

3.Transcribing(ifapplicable)Thedecisionaboutwhetherornottotranscribedependsontheinquiryfocus.Notalloftherecordedmaterialneedstobetranscribed.Transcriptiontime:selectingorsamplingwhattotranscribeaccordingtotheinquiryfocusandthepracticalities.Foraccuracy,youwillneedtoslowdownorrewindtherecording.Adetailedtranscriptfromalessoninanoisyenvironmentcouldtakeupto5or6timesthelengthoftherecording!Ifyouareinterestedinmeaningandfunctionoflanguage,forexampleanalysingquestioningorexploringhowmuchstudentsbuildonothers’ideas,you can choose “intelligent verbatim”. This includes the essence of the interaction, leaving out the unnecessaries (e.g. pauses, repetitions). Thismethodinevitablyinvolvesaconsiderabledegreeofjudgementandselectionaboutwhattoinclude.Ifyourinquiryfocusdemandsaverydetailedandaccuraterecordofexactlywhatwassaid,fullverbatimwouldbemoresuitable.Thisincludesmoreexactdetailsoftheactualspokenwordsandothersounds(e.g.laughter),pausesandotherfeaturesoftiming,sometimeswithaccompanyingnotesabouttoneofvoice,gestures,andsoon.Thismethodstillinvolvesadegreeofjudgementandselectionaboutwhattoinclude.Anytranscription,howeverdetailed,canonlybearepresentationofwhatactuallyoccurred.Anyrecordingcanonlybepartial.Researchersoftenfinditusefultomakeaninitialtranscriptionandthenaddtothis,whilelisteningagaintotherecording-oftenseveraltimes-inordertobuildupthebestpossibleunderstandingoftheconversationthatoccurred.


43

ToolsfortranscribingTherearesomesoftwaretoolsthatassistwithtranscribing,suchas:

- Inqscribe-freesoftware,usefultoslowdownrecording;runsonAppleorWindows(https://www.inqscribe.com/);notethattranscriptscannotbeexportedfromthefreeversionbuttheycanbecutandpasted

- Easytranscript–freesoftware,runsonAppleorWindowsandallowstheusertoexportfileshttp://www.e-werkzeug.eu/index.php/en/products/easytranscript

You could also look for features that are built into the camera, computer or other recording device, such as the option to mark timecodes or‘bookmark’interestingsectionsthatcanbereturnedtolater.Transcribingnotation:Researchersusesomeconventionstoindicatesignificantnonverbaleventsandyoumaychoosehowmuchofthistoincludeinyourownrecords.Onourongoingprojectweusethefollowingsimplerules,adaptedfromJefferson(1984).AdaptedJeffersonnotation4 Symbol Name Use

(3+) LongPause Apauseofatleast3seconds.

(text) Parentheses Speechwhichisunclearorindoubtinthetranscript.

((italictext)) Italic+DoubleParentheses

Annotationofnon-verbalactivityorindicationofwhotheaddresseeiswherethisisotherwiseunclear.

4 Full Transcription Notation is described in G. Jefferson, “Transcription Notation,” in J. Maxwell Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds), Structures of Social Interaction, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984.


44

SECTION6:Templatesforobservingandcodingdialogue

CODINGSCHEMEFORLIVEOBSERVATIONInthissectionweoffersometoolsfor lookingsystematicallyatdialogue inbothwholeclassandgroupworkcontexts,startingwiththelatter.First,Whatisyourfocusandinquiryquestion? It is importanttoidentifythisatthestart(seeexamplesinSection4andSection7).Then,Howwillyouansweryourquestionbydevelopingyour inquiryplanandmethods?T-SEDAofferssomeoptionsusingstructuredobservationtechniquessuchaschecklists,gridandratingscales.Thesearemostefficientwhenyoualreadyknowwhattypesoftalkyouarelookingfor(seecategoriesinSection2).PartAconcentratesonhowfrequentlydifferentindicatorsofdialogueoccurinagivenepisode.Weaddsomeratingscalestoindicateparticipationlevelsoverthewholeepisodetoo,i.e.howmuchparticipantsarecontributingtotheinteractionsandactivitiesoftheclassorgroup.Theseapproachescanbeusedseparately,dependingonthepurposeandfeasibility(e.g.howmuchtimeisavailable).Theycanalsobeusedinacombinationoffine-grainedandbroaderanalysis,whichcanbeparticularlyinformativeandpowerful inshowinghowclassroomdialogueworksinpractice.AneditableversionofthisschemecanbefoundinAppendix3.


45

PARTA:Time-samplingcodingforgroupwork

Thistime-samplingapproach is intendedtobeusedbytheteacheroranother investigatorforobservingstudentsworking ingroups.Groupwork iscommonly seen to be one of the best opportunities for students to engage in productive classroom dialogue, allowing each the opportunity toparticipate.Theidealgroupsizerangesfrom3-6,dependingonanumberoffactors,suchastheageofthestudents,theirexperienceingroupwork,andthenatureof thegroupactivity. Inquiryquestionsaboutgroupworkmaytouchonanumberof interrelatedaspectsof thestudents’dialogue,social relationships, and learning. It is almost inevitable that, whatever the initial inquiry focus, other elements will become relevant to drawingconclusions.Forinstance,shouldnon-verbalcommunicationbetakenintoaccount?Whatabouttheparticularinfluencesoftechnologyuse?Inordertoprepareforandhandlethiscomplexity,therecommendationistofocusatleastoneinquiryquestioncentrallyonjust1-2clustersorcodes.Also,usethe‘Comments’spaceattheendtorecordnotesaboutanyotherinsightfulobservationsoranythingthatseemedtoinfluencethediscussion.Thiswillkeepdialogueattheforefrontoftheinquiry,whilestillallowingotherfactorstobeconsidered.‘Timesampling’isacommontechniqueusedbyresearcherstosampleeventsatregulartimeintervalsduringanepisodeorwholelesson.Itisbasedon the notion that recording and categorising every single communication or action is often too demanding, while sampling over time gives theresearcheraroughlyaccuratepicture,oratleastonethatisinformativeenoughtomakedistinctionsbetweenindividuals.Researchersmightobservea group of learners simultaneously or instead categorise the communications of each individual participant in turn, depending on purpose andfeasibility.Timesamplingcanbeaccompaniedbywrittennotesifdesired.Atimepatternforobservingeventsisdecidedinadvanceandforcomplexbehaviours such as dialogic communication whose form and purpose can change quickly, time intervals will be quite short so as to allow theresearcher to listen carefully and categorise accurately. In these cases a “rest” period is commonly usedwhenobserving live as concentrating oncloselyobservingandanalysing interaction isvery tiringand it iseasy tomiss things. Ifavideo record isavailable, it canof coursebe replayedorsloweddownsocodingcantakeplacewithouttimepressures,asmentionedintheprevioussectionofthisresource.The time-sampling example below uses the categories EL ‘Elaborate and build on ideas’ and ‘Querying’ throughout, but these can be changedaccordingtoneedandinterest;seethefullerschemeinSection2formoreoptions.


46

Time-samplingtemplate

Guidancenotes:● Writethenamesofthestudentsofthegroupyouarefocusingoninthetablebelow(youcanadd/deletecolumns)● Eachwindowis1minute:40secondsforcloseobservationandsimultaneouscodingand20secondsforresting.● For each window (minute), tick the box (√) if the identified student used Elaborating (EL) or Querying (Q) in his/her contributions to the

dialogue.Notethatinsomecircumstancestallycodingforeachrelevantcontributionmaybeusefulandappropriate;thisoffersmoredetailaboutfrequenciesbutishardertorecordaccurately.

● Ifduringthe40seconds,theteacher,teachingassistantorsimilaradultwaspresentorinteractedwithstudents,ticktherelevantbox(√)● Usethecommentsboxbelowtoaddanyfurtherrelevantinformationnotcapturedbythetime-samplingcoding

Windows Teacher/TA

presentStudent1:

……………………

Student2:

………………………

Student3:

………………………..

Student4:

……………………….

Q EL Q EL Q EL Q EL1 2 3 4 5

Comments:Pleaseusethisspacetorecordanyotherinsightfulobservationsoranythingthatseemedtoinfluencethediscussion.


47

PARTB:Checklistforindividualstudents(groupwork) Thischecklistapproachcanbeusedattheendofagroupworkactivity.ItcanserveasasummaryofPartA,oriftime-samplingisnotpossible,itcanbecompleted independently. It aims to provide an indication of the overall participation of individual students in the given activity, focusing on theaspectsofdialoguethataremostrelevanttotheinquiryfocus.Thischecklistcanberepeatediftheactivityorthegroupchanges,providingarecordofdifferentfactorsthatmayinfluencestudentparticipationindialogueondifferentoccasions.AsinPartA(time-sampling)theideaistoconsiderthequalityofstudents’participationinrelationtoselectedcategories(inthiscaseELandQ).Checklistsof this typecannotclaimtoprovideexactmeasurements,andtheyarenot intendedtodothishere.The intention ismoretoprovideamanageablebasisfornoticingandrecordingpotentiallysignificantdifferencesbetweenindividualstudentparticipation,includingchangesovertimeindifferentgroupactivitycontexts.Theseobservationscanthenbethebasisfordiscussionandwithstaffcolleaguesandstudentsthemselves,helpingtoidentifywherefurtheractionmaybeneeded.Guidancenotes:● Writethenamesofthestudentsofthegroupyouarefocusingon(youcanadd/deleterowsasappropriate)● Foreachstudent,tickthebox(√)iftheyhaveshownElaborating(EL)orQuerying(Q)intheiroverallcontributionstothegroupdiscussion● Use theRatingcolumnto indicate theextentofparticipationofeachstudent in theoveralldiscussion.Use the following three-point scale:

1=Lowparticipation,2=Mediumparticipation,3=Highparticipation.Theselevelsshouldbejudgedinrelationtothegeneralparticipationlevelsinthisactivity,notthetypicalorexpectedparticipationofindividualstudentsasjudgedfrompreviousexperience.

Students’Names Q ELRatingofoverallparticipation

1) 2) 3)


48

PARTC:Grouprating(groupwork)

AswithPartB,thisgroupratingcanbeusedattheendofeachgroupworkactivity(andrepeatediftheactivityorthegroupchanges).Itsmainpurposeistorecord judgementsaboutthegroupasawhole,basingtheratingsontheselectedcategories(inthiscaseELandQ).Thisgroupratingcanbehelpfulforestablishingthegeneralnatureofdialogueinagroupactivity.Thequalityofdialoguecanthenbemonitoredforthegroupasawhole.Italsoprovidesacontext for judging individualstudentparticipation (e.g. if thewholegroup isnotelaborating, that is,buildingwelloneachother’sideasthenitisharderforonestudenttodothisthaninagroupwhere‘Elaboratingandbuildingon’iswell-established).Guidancenotes:● Useathree-pointratingscaleforthefrequencyofeachdialoguecategorywithintheconversationasawhole:1=low,2=medium,3=high● Usethe‘Comments’columntoaddanyrelevantinformationtotherating,suchaswhethertheresultsaretypical,oriftheyshowprogress

Ratingquantity(1-3) CommentsQ

EL


49

PARTD:Whole-classparticipationoverview(ratingscale) This whole-class rating scale extends Part C to focus on whole-class talk. It is designed to support reflection on student participation in whole classinteraction.Thisincludesthefrequencyandlengthofcontributionsandthenumbersofstudentsinvolvedindialogueduringparticulartypesofwhole-classactivity,suchas ‘lessonintroduction’, ‘wholeclassdiscussion’, ‘plenary’,etc.(left-handcolumn).Thisoverviewcanhelptomonitorthenatureofdialogueduringthesewhole-classactivities,bearinginmindhowtheexpectationsfordialoguecanvaryevenwithinasinglelesson.

Guidance

• Selectoneortwocodingcategoriesthatarecentraltoyourinquiry.TheexamplebelowusesELandQ.Ifyouareinterestedininvitations,thenIELandQmaybeagoodcombination.ForotherexamplesseeCodingframeworkinSection2.

• Addthetypesofactivitiestakingplaceduringthelessoninthefirstcolumn(add/deleterowsasappropriate).Foreachactivityaddyourratingsinresponsetoeachquestion.

• Usethefollowingratingscale:5=allthetime/asmanystudentsaspossible,4=mostofthetime/mostofthepossiblestudents,3=someofthetime/someofthepossiblestudents,2=occasionally/afewofthepossiblestudents,1=never/noneofthestudents

Activitytype Category Howoftenarestudentsdoingthis?

Howmanystudentsaretakingpartinthis?

Arethesecontributionsextendedratherthanshort?

1) Elaborate(EL)

Querying(Q)

2) Elaborate(EL)

Querying(Q)


50

PartE:StudentparticipationandTalkrulesratingscales

Onceyouarefamiliarwiththemethodsabove,youmightliketousethese3-pointscalestomakeassessmentsacrossawholelessonorforeachactivity–inyourownclassroomorwhenobservingapeer.

Dimension

0

Notevident

1

Teacher-led

2

Teacher-ledwithstudentinvolvement

Talkrules Noexplicitfocusongroundrulesfordialogueordialogicpracticesisapparent

Theteacherintroduces,modelsorremindsstudentsoftargetdialogicpractices,e.g.groundrulestobefollowed,inclusiveturntaking.

Teacherandstudentsorstudentsthemselvesnegotiatetargetdialogicpractices,e.g.groundrules,perhapsalongwithreminders/modelling.

Itmayalsoincludestudentsbeinggivenortakingresponsibilityformanagingthedialogue,aswellasstudentsbeinginvolvedinevaluatingeffectivenessofdialogicpractices.

Studentparticipation

Publicexchangesinwhole-classsituationorgroupworkconsistinteacherquestioningandsuccinctstudents'contributions

or

Studentsdon'thaveopportunitiestodiscusstheirideaspublicly

Studentsexpresstheirideaspubliclyatlengthinwhole-classsituationandgroupwork,buttheydon'tengagewitheachother’sideas

Multiplestudentsexpresstheirideaspubliclyatlengthinwhole-classsituationandgroupwork

AND

Indoingso,theyengagewitheachother’sideas,forexamplebyreferringbacktotheircontributions,challengingorelaboratingonthem(e.g.‘It’sabitlikewhatShootlesaidbut….’,‘Samhadsuchagreatidea,look[demonstrates]’).Thisincludesspontaneousorteacher-promptedparticipation.


51

Workedexamples


52

SECTION7:Workedexamples Thissectionincludestwoworkedexamplesofteachers’useofT-SEDAwrittenbymembersofthedevelopmentteam.Thefirstoneisbasedonasmallproject inwhichelementsof T-SEDAwereused to investigate theextent towhich studentparticipation in small groupdialogue couldbe seenasequitable.Thesecondone,focusingonteacherandpupilparticipationinwhole-classdialogue,isbasedontheMastersresearchprojectofateacherwho is part of the T-SEDA development team. Both examples include supporting notes (in the right-hand column) to show the key points andquestionsthatunderpinnedeachcase‘story’.Ablankformis includedinAppendix4fordevelopingyourownworkedexamples.Aconciseworkedexamplecanalsobeaveryeffectivewayofsharinginvestigationfindingswithcolleagues.ThesewouldalsobeveryusefultoaddtotheT-SEDApackforotherstoread.

CaseStudy1:Inquiringaboutequityinstudentparticipationindialogue Pointsandquestions

Enquiry:Lily,ayear5teacher,wantedtofindoutaboutchildren’sparticipationinreasoninginhersciencelessons.Shehadpreviouslyestablishedthegroundrulesforproductivetalkduringgroupwork,andshehadgainedageneralimpressionthatthechildrenwererespondingwell.Shewas,however,concernedthatsomeindividualchildrenmaybemarginalisedorexcludedfromthegroupdiscussions,whileothersmaybetalkingagreatdealwithoutlisteningtootherideas.Shethereforedecidedtofindoutwhetherthestudentsparticipateequitablyinthedialogueduringsciencegroupwork.Shealsowantedtoseeiftherewereanyidentifiableobstaclestotheequitableparticipation,andanyopportunitiestointerveneandenhancethis.Shedecidedtofocusonjusttwoaspectsofdialogueinordertoberealisticandmanageableinherinquiry.SheselectedR(reasoning)becauseofitscurrentrelevancetohersciencelearningobjectives;andEL(elaboratingandbuildingon)becauseofherinterestinseeinghowthechildrenrespondedtoeachotherandtookaccountofdifferentideasintheirdiscussion.

● Nameofteacher,agegroup● Generalinvestigativepurpose● Existingdialogicconditions,

previousactionsandgeneralevaluationofthestartingpoint

● Specificconcernsandinvestigativefocus,andinquiryquestion(s)

● Intended/hopedforoutcomes● Focusingandmanagingthe

investigation○ Whichaspectsofdialogue

andwhy?○ Practicalissues


53

Method:Lilydecidedtousetimesampling,employingPartAoftheT-SEDAobservationscheme.Shehadsomepreviousexperienceinsystematicclassroomobservation,soshewasconfidentaboutusingtime-samplingreasonablyaccuratelyandshefeltthatthisrigorousapproachwouldhelphertonoticesignificantinteractionsthatshemightotherwisemiss.Shealsohadsomestudentteacherassistanceintwoforthcomingsciencelessons,soshefeltabletodevotesomeofherowntimetodetailed‘live’observationoftwogroupswhilehercolleaguetookresponsibilityfortheclass.Thelessonsfocusedontheanatomyoftheflower,withassociatedgrouptasks.Forinstance,onetaskinvolvedthechildrenworkingtogethertolabelthepartsofaflower.Theystudentsdissectedrealflowersaswellasworkingontheinteractivewhiteboardfollowingasequenceofguidedquestioning.Lilyidentifiedtwo10-minuteslotswhenshecouldbeavailableduringthelessonandshepreparedherselfwithaprintedcopyofthechecklistandatimeronherphone.Shesatclosetothestudentgroupataseparatetable.SheadoptedthetimingsuggestedinPartA,i.e.observation‘windows’of1minuteand40secondsforcloseobservationandsimultaneouscoding,followedby20secondsforresting.ForeachwindowshetickedtheboxwhentheidentifiedstudentusedReasoning(R)orElaboratingandbuildingon(EL)inhis/hercontributionstothedialogue.Shedecidedjusttotickonceineachwindowratherthantallyingthenumberofcontributions,sinceshefeltthatshethiswouldbepracticallymanageableandsufficienttoprovideaninitialoverviewofeachchild’sparticipation.Whenshehadcompletedhertime-sampling,sheusedPartBoftheT-SEDAtorateeachchild’sparticipationas‘high’,‘medium’and‘low’,judgingthisinrelationtothegeneralparticipationlevelsinthisactivity(i.e.notthetypicalorexpectedparticipationofindividualstudentsasjudgedfrompreviousexperience).

● Decisionaboutobservationapproach(withreferencetotheT-SEDAtools

● Previousexperienceandconfidencetoproceed

● Specificgoals● Practicalconsiderations● Focusoflessonandstudentactivity

● Decisionsaboutwhenandhowmuchobservationtime

● Technicaltoolsandphysicalarrangements

● Observationandrecordingdetails(followingoradaptedfromrelevantT-SEDAtool)

● Reasonsforobservationandrecordingdecisions

● Stagesofinvestigation(withreferencetoT-SEDAtoolsinuse)


54

Findings:Lily’sratingsshowedcleardifferencesbetweenthechildren’sparticipationinbothlessons:Onechildwasratedasconsistently‘high’in(R)‘reasoning’,butnot(EL)‘elaborating’,andonechildwasratedasconsistently‘low’inboth.Twootherchildrenweremoreambiguous,withmixedratingsthatdifferedbetweenthetwolessons.Oneofthechildrenwhoreceivedmixedratingshadcontributedalottoreasoninginonelesson,butdidverylittletobuildonothers’ideas.Inthenextlessonthischildthendidmuchlessreasoningandgenerallycontributedless.OnreflectionLilyrealisedthatthischild’shighlevelofreasoninginthefirstlessonoccurredwhenthechildwasleadingthewrittenresponseontheIWB,whileinthenextlessonthischildwaswatchingothersinthisrole.Withregardtothechildwhowasratedconsistentlylowinbothlessons,Lilywasconcernedtonoteonthetimesamplerecordthatnoneoftheothersrespondedtoanyofhissuggestions;theyjustseemedtotalkingoverhimandcontinuingtheirownconversation.

● Broadfindingsinrelationtoinquiryquestion(s)

● Sampleobservationsrelevanttotheinquiry,particularlypotentiallycallingforfurtherinvestigation

● Reflectivecommentdrawingonteacher’swiderknowledgeofthechildrenandclassroom

● Identificationofpotentiallyseriousconcernsnotpreviouslyevident(learning;social;etc)

Evaluation:Lilyfoundthistobeamanageableshortinquirythatconfirmedandextendedherunderstandingofthechildren’sparticipationinsciencegroupwork.Shefeltthatshehadnoticedaspectsofthechildren’sinteractionsandactivitythatshehadmissedbefore.Onreflectionsheconcludedthattherewasnotequitableparticipationindialoguewhenreferringjusttotheactualamountofcontributionsfromeachchild.Shealsonoted,however,thatthechildrendidseemtosharedifferentelementsofthetaskbetweenthem,soweretheytakingcollectiveresponsibilityfor‘dividingthelabour’andcompletingthetaskasgroup?Thisledhertoreflectonwhatsheunderstoodandexpectedofthechildren’sparticipationingroupwork,particularlyintermsofhowindividualcontributionstotalk,activityandsocialrelationsmightvaryovertime.

● Overallevaluationoffindingsandmanageability

● Specificpointsnoticed● Reflectivesummaryand

conclusionsrelatingtotheinquiryquestion(s)

● Widercriticalreflectionsonclassroomdialogueandlearning

WhereNext?Lilydecidedthat,havingnowtunedintothequestionofequitableparticipationingroupwork,shewouldcontinueherinvestigationintwoways:(1)asaprioritytoobservethechildwhowasconsistentlyrated‘low’(usinganopennarrativestyle),andalsototalktohimindividuallyabouthisfeelingsaboutlearningintheclass;(2)tofindfurtheropportunitiestoobservegroups

● Identifyingnextstepsintheinvestigation

● Priorities(e.g.inrelationtoanyseriousconcernsemerging)andgeneraldevelopment


55

systematicallytodevelopher‘noticing’andensurethatshewasnotrelyingonherassumptionsaboutthechildren.InordertodothisshedecidedtojustusePartBoftheT-SEDAscheme,adaptingtheformattocreateatallychartforthewholeofeachobservationperiod.Shefeltthiswouldserveherpurposessufficientlyintakinghertothenextstageofinquiry,andthatshedidnotneedtorepeattheintensivetime-samplingthatshehadstartedwith.Herultimateaimremainedtoidentifyanyobstaclestotheequitableparticipationofindividualsandgroupsofchildren,andtofindopportunitiestointerveneandenhancethechildren’sinclusioninclassroomdialogueandlearning.

● Potentialuseofotherinvestigativetools(e.g.interviews)

● FurtheruseofT-SEDAtools(includingrationaleforanyadaptations)

● Ultimateaimsinrelationtoeducationalvaluesandprioritiesforthestudents

NB.Generalemphasisthroughoutonteacher’sownershipanddecisionmakingofthewholeprocess


56

Casestudy2:Inquiryintothelevelandnatureofteacherandpupilparticipationinwholeclassdialogue

Detailstoinclude

Enquiry:Lisa,ayear5teacher,wasteachingasinglelessononphotosynthesis,andwantedtofindouthowmuchguidingshemightdoduringaninitialdiscussion,andhowmuchthestudentswouldbeabletoexpresstheirideasfrompriorlearning.ShedecidedtofocusonG(guidedirectionofdialogueoractivity)inrelationtoherself,andE(expressorinviteideas)inrelationtothestudents.

● Teachername(orpseudonym),yeargroup

● Whatisthelessonsubjectandfocus?

● Whatisthereasonfortheinvestigation?

● Isthereanypriorlearningwhichisrelevant?

● Whatwillthedialogicfocusbe?(chosencodes)

Method:LisadecidedtousepartD(wholeclassoverview)oftheT-SEDA.Lisadidnothaveanyotheradultstocalluponduringthelesson,andwantedtoconductawholeclassdialogueinwhichshewouldbeinvolved,thereforeobservingandcodingdialogue‘live’wouldnotbepossible.Shedecidedtoaudiorecordtheintroductorydiscussionofthelessonsothatshecouldlistentoitlater.ThismethodwouldenablehertoreflectonthedialogueafterthelessoninordertoidentifyoccurrencesofGandE.Thenatureofthediscussionwouldbetoelicitanddrawuponthestudents’priorknowledgeofphotosynthesisandtoguidetheirdiscussiontoafullerunderstandingoftheprocessesinvolvedinplantssynthesisingglucose.

● HowwilltheT-SEDAbeused?● WhywillT-SEDAbeusedinthis

way?● Willanyequipmentbeusedtoaid

theuseofT-SEDA,andwhy?● Whatisthenatureofthedialogue

tobecoded?

Findings:Lisanoticedwhenlisteningtotheaudiothatsheseemedtomakemorecontributionsduringthediscussionthanthestudentsdid,soshedecidedtocounthowmanycontributionsweremadebyherselfandhowmanyweremadebytheclass.Shefoundthatduringthediscussionshemade95

● Whatwasnoticedduringthedialogue?

● Wereanyactionstakenasaresult


57

contributions,whilstthestudentsmade46contributions.Havingcountedthetotalnumberofcontributionsmade,LisadecidedtocalculatethepercentageincidenceofGandEcontributionsmadeduringthediscussionandusetheseincidencestoassessthelevelofcontributionsasdefinedbytheT-SEDA.Thepercentageincidenceofteacher’scontributionscodedasGwas54%ofthetotal,aratingof3,whilstthepercentageincidenceofstudents’contributionscodedasEwas70%ofthetotal,aratingof4.

oftheseobservations?

Evaluation:Lisawassurprisedthatthenumberofcontributionsshemade(95)duringthediscussionwasrelativelyhighcomparedtothenumbermadebytheclass(46)whichmayindicatethatthestudents’priorknowledgeofthesubjectofphotosynthesiswaslessclearthanshehadanticipated.However,since70%ofthose46contributionswerecodedasE,thisindicatesthatthestudentsdidhaveideastoexpressonthesubject,eveniftheyneededquitealotofteacherguidancetostructurethoseideasandreachconclusions.

● Wherethereanyunexpectedobservationsduringthedialogue?

● Whatconclusionscanbedrawnfromtheobservationsaboutthenatureofthedialogue?

● Whatconclusionscanbedrawnaboutthelearningscenario?

NextSteps:Inlightoftherelativelyhighnumberofcontributionsmadebyherselfduringthediscussion,Lisareflectedthatwhenapproachingasubjectforthefirsttimewiththeyeargroup,evenwhentheyhadmetthesubjectinpreviousyears,thatitcouldbeusefultopresentarefresheroftheirpriorlearningbeforeaskingthemtoholdadiscussionandsharetheirknowledge.Shealsowonderedifwholeclassdialoguecouldbestructuredinsuchawaythatherowninputcouldbereduced,andsodecidedtoinvestigatethiswithfurtherinquiry.

● Whatreflectionscanbemadeaboutteachingpracticefromthisevaluation?

● Whatreflectionscanbemadeaboutchildren’sparticipationindialoguefromthisevaluation?

● Whatmightbedonedifferentlyinasimilarsituationinthefuture?


58

Referencestoresearchondialogue

&

linkstoresources


59

SECTION8:Referencestootherresearchondialogueandlinkstorelatedresources.Linkstorelatedresearch-informedresourcesforpractitionersThefollowingresourceswereallproducedbyacademicsattheUniversityofCambridgeandtheircollaborators:ThinkingTogether–anovelprogrammeproducedbyLynDawesandNeilMercerandcolleaguestosupporttheco-constructionoftalkrulesandtheuse of ‘exploratory talk’ inwhich partners engage critically but constructivelywith each other's ideas. Proposalsmay be challenged and counter-challenged via argumentation. The programme had positive effects on primary children's logical problem solving, as well as inmathematics andscience.Extensiveresourcesavailableforteachersarelistedathttp://www.thinking-together.org.uk/OER4Schools–anextensivesetofopen,multimediaprofessionallearningresourcesforprimaryteachersinsub-SaharanAfricawhichcontainsunitsonwhole class dialogue and groupwork, drawing on Thinking Together and a range of other relevant resources, and illustrated with video clips.www.oer4schools.orgA school-based professional development workshop programme to promote dialogic teaching with interactive technologies. Trials showed that(primary,middleandsecondary)teachersdevelopedtheirunderstandingsofclassroomdialogueanddevisednewapproachestosupportit.

Aprintedresourcebookco-authoredwithparticipatingteachersandincludingtheirowncasestoriesofdevelopingdialogicpracticeisalsoavailable:Hennessy,S.,Warwick,P.,Brown,L.,Rawlins,D.,&Neale,C.(Eds.).(2014).DevelopingInteractiveTeachingandLearningUsingtheInteractiveWhiteboard:AResourceforTeachers.Maidenhead:OpenUniversityPress.Anoutlineofface-to-faceworkshopactivitiesguidingteachersthroughtheprofessionaldevelopmentprocessisdownloadableathttp://dialogueiwb.educ.cam.ac.uk/evaluate/.Onlineresourcesincludinganopendigitalresourcebankofannotatedscreenshots,linkstovideoclipsofdialogicclassroompracticeandinteractivewhiteboardflipcharttemplatesforcreatingactivities,areathttp://dialogueiwb.educ.cam.ac.uk/resources/.


60

Onlineresourcesalsoincludeteachers’ownclassroommaterialsdevelopedtosupportdialogueincontextsusingdigitaltechnology–inUKandMexico.AsetofdownloadableresourcesforPrimary/Middle/Secondaryschools–includinginteractivewhiteboardflipchartsthatcanbere-usedormodified–coverarangeofsubjectareasandteachingaims.http://dialogueiwb.educ.cam.ac.uk/evaluate/teachersmaterials/.

DownloadablevideoclipsofdialogicteachinginUK(primary,middleandsecondary)classroomsderivingfromseveralresearchprojectsareavailableat http://sms.cam.ac.uk/collection/1085164. Critique and discussion of other teachers’ practices can offer a powerful stimulus for trying out newapproachesoneself.(Promptsforsuchdiscussionareincludedwithhyperlinkstoclipsintheco-authoredbookandtheOER4Schoolsresource.)Ifyouusedigitaltechnologyinyourclassroom,youmaybeinterestedinourtechnology-specificcodingscheme(Tech-SEDA),whichiscurrentlyunderdevelopment. This offers concrete examples of how specialised technology tools can offer significant ‘added value’ in exploring ideas, supportingreasoninganddrawingattentiontoparticularfeaturesofaprocess.Therearemanyresourcestosupport reflectiveteaching ingeneral, includingthiscomprehensiveoneproducedbyAndrewPollardandcolleagues:http://reflectiveteaching.co.uk/


61

ReferencesandfurtherreadingAlexander,R.(2011).Towardsdialogicteaching:Rethinkingclassroomtalk.Cambridge:Dialogos.[Averyaccessiblywrittenbookletoutliningthekey

principlesofclassroomdialogue]

Dawes, L., Mercer, N., & Wegerif, R. (2003). Thinking Together: A programme of activities for developing thinking skills at KS2. Birmingham:ImaginativeMindsLtd.[Abookofpracticalclassroomactivitiesfordevelopingthetalk,reasoningandcurriculumlearningofchildrenaged8-11].

Hennessy, S.,Mercer,N.,&Warwick, P. (2011). A dialogic inquiry approach toworkingwith teachers in developing classroomdialogue. TeachersCollege Record, 113(9), 1906–1959. [A journal article describing the process and issues involved in academicsworkingwith teachers as co-researchersofdialogicpractices]

Hennessy,S.,Rojas-Drummond,S.,Higham,R.,Márquez,A.M.,Maine,F.,Ríos,R.M.,García-Carrión,R.,Torreblanca,O.,&Barrera,M. J. (2016).Developingacodingschemeforanalysingclassroomdialogueacrosseducationalcontexts.Learning,CultureandSocialInteraction.9,16-44.[AjournalarticledescribingdevelopmentofSEDA,theprecursorcodingschemetoT-SEDA,andthemethodologicalissuesencountered]

Howe,C.,&Abedin,M.(2013).Classroomdialogue:Asystematicreviewacrossfourdecadesofresearch.CambridgeJournalofEducation,43(3),325-356.[Ajournalarticlesummarisingtheresearchontheimpactofclassroomdialogue]

Littleton,K.,&Howe,C.(Eds.).(2010).Educationaldialogues:Understandingandpromotingproductiveinteraction.Abingdon,Oxon:Routledge.[Aneditedbookcontainingchaptersbyexpertsinthefieldontheimportanceofdialogueanditssignificanceforlearningandteaching]

Littleton,K.,&Mercer,N.(2013).Interthinking:Puttingtalktowork.Routledge.[Anaccessiblywrittenbookdescribinghowpeoplethinkcreativelyandproductivelytogetherthroughtalk,andhowtopromotemoreeffectivetalkintheclassroom]

Mercer,N.,&Littleton,K. (2007).DialogueandtheDevelopmentofChildren’sThinking.London:Routledge. [Abookproposinganewsocioculturalaccountoftherelationshipbetweendialogueandchildren’sintellectualdevelopment,relatingresearchfindingstoreal-lifeclassrooms]

Taber,K.(2013)Classroom-basedresearchandevidence-basedpractice:Anintroduction(2nded.).London:Sage.[Abasicresearchmethodstextbookaimedatteachersinschools]

Wilson,E.(2009/2013)‘Actionresearch’,inWilson,E.(Ed.)School-basedresearch:Aguideforeducationstudents.London:Sage.[Abasicresearchmethodstextbookaimedatteachersinschools]


62

AcknowledgementsDevelopmentofT-SEDA(anditsprecursorSEDA)wassupportedbytheBritishAcademy(InternationalPartnershipandMobilityScheme)throughthe3-year project entitled “A Tool for AnalysingDialogic Interactions in Classrooms” (2013-2015). TheMexicanworkwas supported by theDirecciónGeneraldeAsuntosdelPersonalAcadémicooftheNationalAutonomousUniversityofMexico(DGAPA-UNAM)(PAPIITProjectNumber:IN303313andPAPIMENumber:PE305814).Weappreciate thesupportof theEconomicandSocialResearchCouncil (RES063270081;RES000230825), sponsorofmost of theUK team's precedingwork in this area. Ourmost recent ESRC project (ES/M007103/1) entitled ‘ClassroomDialogue: Does itMake aDifference for Student Learning? (Christine Howe, Sara Hennessy, Neil Mercer, Maria Vrikki & Lisa Wheatley: 2015-17.http://tinyurl.com/ESRCdialogue)drewonSEDAtodevelopanew12-categoryschemeandratingscales,testingthemextensivelywithalargesampleof 72 teachers of children aged 10-11; statistical analyses of the relationships between dialogic teaching and student attainment and attitudesproducedthefindingsthathaveshapedthisversionofthepack.Finally,wethankalloftheteachersandstudentswhoparticipatedinourpreviousresearchfromwhichexamplesinthispackhavebeentaken.


63

APPENDIX1:Reflectivecycle ThisisablankformoftheReflectiveCyclethatappearsinSection3.Itcanbeusedfordevelopingyourowncycleandensuringthatyourinvestigationincludesallrelevantsteps.Tocompleteit,fillintheblankboxforeachstep,describingyourplans.Usethequestionsthatappearintheoriginalboxes(displayedinSection3)toguideyourdecisions.


64

APPENDIX2:UsingtheSmartRecorderontheSmartboard5

TheSmartRecorder is an interactivewhiteboard facility that canbeused toaudio record teachernarrationand/oractivity locatedatornear the

board, or a whole class discussion, and it can also capture everything that happens on the screen. It is accessible through the Smart Notebook

application, and can be accessed independently of Notebook as well (check your Applications folder, or use the Spotlight Tool to search for

"Recorder").Thismeansthatitcanbeusedtorecordanythingyoudoonyourcomputer.Oncecomplete,youhaveanindependentmoviefilethat

canbeembeddedinyourclasswikiorblog,or...yes,evenaNotebookfile.YoucanevenuploadyourmovietoYouTubeorTeacherTube,oranyof

theothervideosites,soitisavailableforyourstudentstoviewagainandagainifnecessary.Ireallylovehavingmystudentsusethisrecordertomake

moviesshowinghowtheysolvemathproblems,forexample.NotonlydoIgettowatchwhattheydo,Icanheartheirexplanation,andsavethevideo

asanartifactfortheirportfolio,orforaparentconference.

5 Adapted from a document authored by Megan Bowe, Teacher at Norwich High School for Girls, Norwich, UK


65

Teachername: Subject:

Date: Topic:

Yeargroup/Class: Teacherroleingroup(circleone):Observing/coding

APPENDIX3:CodingSchemeforliveobservation

Whatisyourquestion?Itisimportanttofirstidentifyyourfocus(seeexamplesunderInquiryFocus).***TheexamplesbelowusethecategoriesQuerying(Q)andElaboratingandbuildingon(EL),butthesecanbereplacedwithanyothercategories

selectedinrelationtotheinquiryfocus.

PARTA:Time-samplingcodingforgroupwork

● Writethenamesofthestudentsofthegroupyouarefocusingoninthetablebelow(youcanadd/deletecolumns)● Eachwindowis1minute:40secondsforcloseobservationandsimultaneouscodingand20secondsforresting.● Foreachwindow(minute), tick thebox (√) if the identifiedstudentusedQuerying (Q)orElaboratingandbuildingon (EL) (oryourselected

categories)inhis/hercontributionstothedialogue.Notethatinsomecircumstancestallycodingforeachrelevantcontributionmaybeusefulandappropriate;thisoffersmoredetailaboutfrequenciesbutishardertorecordaccurately.

● Ifduringthe40seconds,theteacher,teachingassistantorsimilaradultwaspresentorinteractedwithstudents,ticktherelevantbox(√)● Usethecommentsboxbelowtoaddanyfurtherrelevantinformationnotcapturedbythetime-samplingcoding


66

Comments:Pleaseusethisspacetorecordanyotherinsightfulobservationsoranythingthatseemedtoinfluencethediscussion(e.g.stronginitiative,facilitationforanotherspeakertojoinin,ignoringcontributions,talkingovercontributions)

Windows Teacher/TApresent

Student1:

……………………….

Student2:

………………………

Student3:

…………………….

Student4:

………………………..

Q EL Q EL Q EL Q EL1 2 3 4 5 6 7


67

PARTB:Checklistforindividualstudents(groupwork)

● Writethenamesofthestudentsofthegroupyouarefocusingon(youcanadd/deleterowsasappropriate)● Foreachstudent, tick thebox (√) if theyhaveshownQuerying (Q)orElaboratingandbuildingon (EL) (oryourselectedcategories) in their

overallcontributionstothegroupdiscussion● UsetheRatingcolumntoindicatetheextentofparticipationofeachstudentintheoveralldiscussion.Usethefollowingthree-pointscale:1=

Lowparticipation,2=Mediumparticipation,3=Highparticipation.Theselevelsshouldbejudgedinrelationtothegeneralparticipationlevelsinthisactivity,notthetypicalorexpectedparticipationofindividualstudentsasjudgedfrompreviousexperience.

Students’Names Q EL Ratingofoverallparticipation

1)

2)

3)

PARTC:Grouprating(groupwork)

● Useathree-pointratingscaleforthefrequencyofeachdialoguecategorywithintheconversationasawhole:1=low,2=medium,3=high● Usethe‘Comments’columntoaddanyrelevantinformationtotherating,suchaswhethertheresultsaretypical,oriftheyshowprogress

Ratingquantity(1-3) Comments

Q

EL


68

PARTD:Whole-classoverview(ratingscale)

Guidance• Selectoneortwocodingcategoriesthatarecentraltoyourinquiry.TheexamplebelowusesELandQ.Ifyouareinterestedininvitations,thenIEL

andQmaybeagoodcombination.ForotherexamplesseeCodingframeworkinSection2.

• Addthetypesofactivitiestakingplaceduringthelessoninthefirstcolumn(add/deleterowsasappropriate).Foreachactivityaddyourratingsinresponsetoeachquestion.

• Usethefollowingratingscale:5=allthetime/asmanystudentsaspossible,4=mostofthetime/mostofthepossiblestudents,3=someofthetime/someofthepossiblestudents,2=occasionally/afewofthepossiblestudents,1=never/noneofthestudents

Activitytype Category Howoftenarestudentsdoingthis? Howmanystudentsaretakingpartinthis?

Arethesecontributionsextendedratherthanshort?

1) Elaborate(EL)

Querying(Q)

2) Elaborate(EL)

Querying(Q)

3) Elaborate(EL)

Querying(Q)


69

APPENDIX4:Workedexample

CasestudyX:Title Keypointsandquestions

Enquiry:

● ● ●

Method:

● ● ●

Findings:

● ● ●

Evaluation:

● ● ●

NextSteps:

● ● ●

TEACHER SCHEME FOR EDUCATIONAL DIALOGUE ANALYSIS (T … · 2018-05-30 · T-SEDA Professional...

Documents

Transcript of TEACHER SCHEME FOR EDUCATIONAL DIALOGUE ANALYSIS (T … · 2018-05-30 · T-SEDA Professional...