Introduction & Background

Classroom talk in subject lessons is highly complex. It functions as a medium, context, and goal of both subject-specific and linguistic learning and provides a space for addressing organizational and social issues under the unique conditions of verbal communication. In this context, classroom talk is characterized by continuous divergent interactions. This concept was adapted and further developed from Brousseau's (1997) “didactic contract”, and “breach” in didactic contract within the framework of joint-action-theory in didactics (Ligozat et al., 2018). Divergent interactions in this study refer to moments in whole-class interaction, where teachers make a verbal demand, typically conveyed through directives or questions, and following learner contributions create a divergence when they are not aligned with the demand. Teachers then typically employ adjustments in interaction to guide learners toward fulfilling the demand.

Teachers play a central role in shaping participation and learning opportunities through their interactional adjustments (Walsh, 2011). Boyd (2012) emphasizes that successful lessons rely on teachers being receptive to “teachable moments” and adjusting their instructions accordingly (p. 29). These adjustments provide “entry points” to high-demanding tasks and help to break down larger tasks to manageable parts  (de Oliveira & Athanases, 2017, p. 123). However, adjustments should not come at the cost of reducing cognitive and linguistic level. Several studies in the literature emphasize that all learners, but particularly emerging multilingual learners (EMLs) benefit from a balance of high challenge and high support (Gibbons, 2015).

Research highlights the positive effects of maintaining high-level cognitive and linguistic demands on student outcomes and learning. For instance, Podschuweit et al. (2016) found that classroom talk characterized by complex teacher and student contributions was positively associated with higher post-test performance. Despite positive evidences, teachers tend towards simplification and overscaffolding, particularly in linguistically diverse classrooms (Morek et al., 2022; de Araujo, 2017; de Oliveira & Athanases, 2017). In mathematics classrooms, I & de Araujo (2019) observed that teachers frequently simplified problem contexts and avoided tasks requiring students to verbalize their reasoning.

Tendency to lower demands can impact both subject-specific and language learning, since cognitively demanding tasks almost always require high linguistic demands (e.g., justifying, argumenting) (Heller & Morek, 2019, p. 113). Several studies show that the types of questions teachers ask significantly influence students’ cognitive engagement and subsequent contributions (Carpenter et al., 2020; Tabach et al., 2020). With reducing the complexity of demands, teachers leave only restricted space for learners and limit their answers to brief responses or keywords (Weil et al., 2020, p. 2). This has been described as positioning learners as “small piece suppliers” (Quasthoff & Prediger, 2017, p. 3) or in “student fill-in-the-blank recitations” (Boyd, 2012, p. 30). This restricted role was seen critical with the argument that high-level linguistic and subject-specific tasks are provided by teachers instead of learners.

Furthermore, many teachers often rely on “a secure script” with asking questions designed to elicit brief, predetermined answers (Pehmer et al., 2015, p. 109). This approach fails to provide opportunities for learners to elaborate, exchange ideas, and engage in high-quality conversations (Gibbons, 2015, p. 32). Given this background, this study investigates the following questions:  

1-    How do teachers adjust their demands during divergent interactions in linguistically diverse mathematics classes?

2-    How can these shifts be describedregarding subject and language learning opportunities for EMLs?

The current study adopts a qualitative exploratory design and focuses on whole-class talk. It is part of the larger video study INTERFACH (https://interfach.de/en/), which was conducted in primary schools. The sample comprises 15 mathematics lessons across six 3rd grade primary school classrooms, predominantly attended by EMLs (ranging from 53% to 87%) in Germany. The schools were chosen from mainstream state schools. The study utilized video-based classroom observations from INTERFACH video study in four primary school classrooms. In two remaining classrooms, the data collection involved audio recordings and observation protocols instead of video recordings due to parental preferences. The research methodology involved qualitative content analysis (QCA) with three main data analysis phases: The first phase of data analysis involved developing a basic coding scheme with an inductive and deductive approach to identify divergent interactions in whole-class talk. The sequences coded as divergent interactions reflected the following interactional pattern: a teacher demand - divergent answers – teacher adjustments - conclusion. Each unit of analysis reflected this pattern. In the second phase of the analysis, a fine-grained coding scheme was created to investigate this pattern in detail. The main categories included teacher demands, divergences, teacher adjustments. Each main category was further divided into sub-categories. The reliability of the coding instrument was assessed with an inter-coder agreement check, conducted with a second coder. Each unit of analysis was coded with this instrument with a sequential analysis approach. The third phase of the analysis involved additional qualitative analysis. To answer the research questions, type-building QCA approach was used and a typology of teachers’ adjustments on their demands was constructed to condense the results.

The findings show that teachers in linguistically diverse classrooms frequently adapt their subject-specific and linguistic demands in response to divergences during interaction. While the analysis identified several types of adjustments, this paper focuses on two contrasting types: reducing high-level demands and enhancing demands. In line with previous research, the most common adjustment involved gradual reduction of high-level demands. A less frequent but notable adjustment involved an enhancement of demands during the course of the interaction. These two adjustment types will be illustrated using representative data segments and discussing their implications for both linguistic and subject-specific learning opportunities. The discussion will address how reducing high-level demands can, on the one hand, promote the continuity of instruction and maintain an uninterrupted flow of interaction, while on the other hand, potentially limit the depth of subject-specific and linguistic engagement. Considering the increasing linguistic diversity in classrooms across Europe and beyond, the findings of this study have relevance for international contexts where teachers of EMLs face similar challenges.

Boyd, M. P. (2012). Planning and Realigning a Lesson in Response to Student Contributions: Intentions and Decision Making. The Elementary School Journal, 113(1), 25–51. Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of Didactical Situations in Mathematics. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Carpenter, S. L., Kim, J., Nilsen, K., Irish, T., Bianchini, J. A., & Berkowitz, A. R. (2020). Secondary science teachers’ use of discourse moves to work with student ideas in classroom discussions. International Journal of Science Education. de Araujo, Z. (2017). Connections between secondary mathematics teachers’ beliefs and their selection of tasks for English language learners. Curriculum Inquiry. de Oliveira, L. & Athanases, S. (2017). A Framework to Reenvision Instructional Scaffolding for Linguistically Diverse Learners. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 61(2), 123–129. Gibbons, P. (2015). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning: Teaching English language learners in the mainstream classroom. Heinemann. Heller, V., & Morek, M. (2019). Fachliches und sprachliches Lernen durch Diskurs(erwerbs)orientierte Unterrichtsgespräche. Empirische Evidenzen und Desiderata mit Blick auf inklusive Settings. I, J. Y., & de Araujo, Z. (2019). An examination of monolingual preservice teachers’ set-up of cognitively demanding mathematics tasks with emergent multilingual students. Research in Mathematics Education, 21(2), 208–228. Ligozat, F., Lundqvist, E., & Amade-Escot, C. (2018). Analysing the continuity of teaching and learning in classroom actions: When the joint action framework in didactics meets the pragmatist approach to classroom discourses. European Educational Research Journal, 17(1), 147–169. Morek, M., Heller, V., Kinalzik, N., Schneider, V. (2022). Von der Gesprächsanalyse zur Entwicklung des interaktionssensiblen Kodierinstruments ISKODIL: Ausprägungen diskurserwerbsförderlicher Unterrichtsgespräche erfassen. Zeitschrift für Sprachlich-Literarisches Lernen und Deutschdidaktik 2. Pehmer, A.-K., Gröschner, A., & Seidel, T. (2015). How teacher professional development regarding classroom dialogue affects students’ higher-order learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 108–119. Podschuweit, S., Bernholt, S., & Brückmann, M. (2016). Classroom learning and achievement: How the complexity of classroom interaction impacts students’ learning. Research in Science & Technological Education, 34(2), 142–163. Tabach, M., Hershkowitz, R., Azmon, S., & Dreyfus, T. (2020). Following the Traces of Teachers’ Talk-Moves in Their Students’ Verbal and Written Responses. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 18, 509–528. Quasthoff, U. & Prediger, S. (2017). Fachbezogene Unterrichtsdiskurse zu Beginn der weiterführenden Schule - Interdisziplinäre Untersuchungen zur Unterstützung von sprachlichem und fachlichem Lernen. In: Form und Funktion. Festschrift für Angelika Redder zum 65. Geburtstag. Tübingen, 625-644. Weil, M., Seidel, T., Schindler, A.-K., & Gröschner, A. (2020). Opening ‘windows’ for teachers to change classroom discourse. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 26.