Further Mechanisms Employed by Primary School Children to Establish and Maintain Collaboration and Achieve Exploratory Talk.

Author(s):

Caroline Colfer(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2014

Network:

21. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)

Format:

Paper

Session Information

ERG SES C 09, Children and Education

Paper Session

Time:

2014-09-01

11:00-12:30

Room:

FPCEUP - 248

Chair:

Maria Pacheco Figueiredo

Contribution

Talk drives cognition. If we truly believe in a social constructivist pedagogy then we, as teachers and teacher educators, must find ways of enabling all children to access talk of an ‘exploratory' nature (Barnes, 1976; Mercer, Wegerif & Dawes, 1999). Barlex and Welsh (2007) recognize the idea of pupils being able to make better design decisions, through the use of exploratory talk as ‘tantalising’ and worthy of consideration. Currently, the lack of such talk and its potential for learning is not only strongly lamented (Alexander, 2012; Rose, 2009; Mercer and Littleton 2007) but the struggle to get UK government ministers to understand its value still a frustration (Littleton and Mercer, 2013). The situation is further exacerbated by findings that true collaborative activity, a necessary pre-requisite of exploratory talk, rarely happens (Blatchford, Hallam, Ireson, Kutnick & Creech, 2009). This paper identifies how some groups of children managed to foster and sustain collaboration and the exploratory talk, so elusive to current practice, and seemingly, untenable for other groups.

Method

The study examined transcripts from videoed episodes of exploratory talk, identified using Mercer, Wegerif and Dawes (1999) typology, by groups of year 6 children, working independently of a teacher, whilst engaged in a collaborative, problem-solving design and technology task. Sociocultural discourse analysis (Mercer, 2004) was the adopted methodology. Children were purposively selected for mixed gender groups on the basis of similar spoken ability (Piaget, 1968), mixed ability in design and technology and non-friendship groups (Leaper and Smith, 2004). Children's spoken ability was assessed using the British Picture Vocabulary Scale (BSVP 2), a test of received language. Episodes of exploratory talk were analysed against the gender-related language features of assertive and affiliative speech (Leaper and Smith, 2004). Given that advocates of talk assert its potential for driving cognition, these episodes of exploratory talk were more specifically analysed against the theoretical perspectives of Vygotsky and Piaget.

Expected Outcomes

Evidence suggested whilst ground rules functioned to maintain collaboration for some groups, adherence did not necessarily lead to exploratory talk. Analysis revealed where exploratory talk flourished children used specific mechanisms and linguistic features. These identifiable ways of using language allowed children to build rapport, maintain collaborative endeavour, structure criticism in acceptable ways and make thinking visible to peers. This paper focuses on how children used features of gendered language to maintain collaboration; a necessary pre-requisite for exploratory talk. The argument for the value of these pivotal linguistic features is further corroborated by the finding that, where they were not present in children's dialogue, collaboration was absent, talk defaulted to that typified by Mercer, Wegerif & Dawes (1999) as disputational and opportunities for learning were lost. Recommendations for fostering and maintaining exploratory talk, based on this study's identified mechanisms and ways of using language, have been translated into specific teaching and learning strategies suitable for classroom practice when problem-solving.

References

Alexander, R. (2012) Improving Oracy and Classroom Talk in English Schools: Achievements and Challenges. University of Cambridge Extended and referenced version of a presentation given at the DfE Seminar on Oracy, the National Curriculum and Educational Standards, 20 February 2012. Blatchford, P., Hallam,S., Ireson, J., Kutnick, P. and Creech, A. (2009) Classes, groups and transitions: structures for teaching and learning. Primary Review Research Survey 9/2, Cambridge: University of Cambridge. Leaper, C. and Smith,T. (2004) A meta-analytic review of gender variations in children’s language use: talkativeness, affiliative speech and assertive speech. Developmental Psychology Vol 40, No 6, 993-1027. Mercer, N. (2004) Socio-cultural discourse analysis: analysing classroom talk as a social mode of thinking. Journal of Applied Linguistics Vol 1, No 2, 137-168. Mercer, N. Wegerif, R. and Dawes, L. (1999) Children’s talk and the development of reasoning in the classroom. British Educational Research Journal, Vol 13, No 1, 95-111. Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in Society: the Developmental Processes of Higher Psychological Processes in Cole, M. John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S. and Souberman, E. (eds.) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Author Information

Caroline Colfer (presenting / submitting)

University of Sy Mark & St John

Initial Teacher Education

Plymouth

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.