‘What would you do if…?’
On asking Experience Questions within classroom discussions, with a view to making room for subjectification
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/rcsi.29448Keywords:
classroom interaction, conversation analysis, experience questions, subjectification, mother tongue educationAbstract
In this study, we observed classroom discussions in which teachers aimed to work on subjectification. Teachers were found to ask ‘Experience Questions’, which we define as questions that prompt the recipient to disclose how he/she would act or feel in a given situation. By applying Conversation Analysis, we show that post-expansion is provoked by either 1) inviting other students to respond to the initial response; 2) inviting the same student to elaborate on his/her response. When teachers invite other students, discussions are elicited that mostly involve cumulative lists of different responses to the initial Experience Question. When teachers invite the same student, discussions follow in which students take learner-initiatives to address the given response.
References
Adler, R. B. & Rodman, G. (2003). Understanding Human Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Allwright, D. L. (1980). Turns, Topics and Tasks: Patterns of Participation in Language Learning and Teaching. In Discourse Analysis in Second Language Research, ed. by Diane Larsen-Freeman (pp. 165–87). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Athanasiadou, A. & Dirven, R. (1997). Conditionality, Hypotheticality, Counterfactuality. In On Conditionals Again, ed. by Angeliki Athanasiadou, and René Dirven (pp. 61–96). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.143.05ath
Balen, van J., Gosen, M.N., Vries, de S., & Koole T. (2022a). ”What do you think?” How interaction unfolds following opinion-seeking questions and implications for encouraging subjectification in education. Linguistics and Education, 69, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2022.101037
Balen, van, J., Gosen, M.N., Vries, de S. & Koole, T. (2022b). Taking learner initiatives within classroom discussions with room for subjectification. Classroom Discourse, 1–19.
Benner, D. (2015). Allgemeine Pädagogik [General Theory of Education], 8th ed. Weinheim & München, Germany: Juventa.
Biesta, G. (2009). Good Education in an Age of Measurement: On the Need to Reconnect with the Question of Purpose in Education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9064-9
Biesta, G. (2012). Goed onderwijs en de cultuur van het meten [Good education and the culture of measuring]. Den Haag: Boom Lemma.
Biesta, G. (2015). Het prachtige risico van onderwijs [The Beautiful Risk of Education]. Culemborg: Phronese.
Biesta, G. (2018a). De terugkeer van het lesgeven [The Rediscovery of Teaching]. Culemborg: Phronese.
Biesta, G. (2018b). Tijd voor pedagogiek [Time for pedagogy]. Utrecht: Universtiteit voor Humanistiek, Net aan Zet. https://doi.org/10.5117/PED2018.3.004.BIES
Biesta, G. (2020). Risking Ourselves in Education: Qualification, Socialisation, and Subjectification Revisited. Educational Theory, 70(1), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12411
Böhm, W. (1997). Entwürfe zu einer Pädagogik der Person: gesammelte Aufsätze. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Bongelli, R., Riccioni, I., Fermani, A., & Philip, G. (2020). Hypothetical Questions in Everyday Italian Conversations. Lingua, 246, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102951
Cazden, C. (2001). Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R.C., & Waggoner, M.A. (2001). Patterns of Discourse in Two Kinds of Literature Discussions. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 378–411. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.36.4.3
Cullen, R. (2002). Supportive Teacher Talk: The Importance of the F-Move. ELT Journal, 56(2), 117–127. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.2.117
Degoumois, V., Petitjean, C., & Pekarek-Doehler, S.P. (2017). Expressing Personal Opinions in Classroom Interaction: The Role of Humor and Displays of Uncertainty. In Interactional Competences in Institutional Settings from School to the Workplace, ed. by Pekarek P. Doehler, Genevieve De Weck, Laurent Filliettaz, Esther Conzales-Martinez, and Cécile Petitjean, 29–57. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46867-9_2
Egbert, M. M. (1997). Schisming: The Collaborative Transformation from a Single Conversation to Multiple Conversations. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 30(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3001_1
Englert, C. (2010). Questions and Responses in Dutch Conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(10), 2666–2684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.005
Gardner, R., & Mushin, I. (2017). Epistemic Trajectories in the Classroom: How Children Respond in Informing Sequences. In Children’s Knowledge in Interaction, ed. by Amanda Bateman, and Amelia Church, 13–36. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1703-2_2
Gardner, R. (2019). Classroom Interaction Research: The State of the Art.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 52(3), 212–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2019.1631037
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Goodwin, C., & Goodwin M.H. (1987). Concurrent Operations on Talk: Notes on the Interactive Organization of Assessments. IPrA Papers in Pragmatics 1(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1075/iprapip.1.1.01goo
Goodwin, M. H. & Goodwin C. (2004). Participation. In A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology, ed. by A. Duranti, 222–244. Hoboken, New Jersey: Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470996522.ch10
Gosen, M. N., Berenst, J. & De Glopper, K. (2009). Participeren tijdens het voorlezen van prentenboeken in de kleuterklas: een pilot study [Participating in shared book reading in kindergarten: A pilot study]. Toegepaste Taalwetenschap in Artikelen, 81(1), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1075/ttwia.81.06gos
Heritage, J. (2013). Epistemics in Conversation. In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 370–394. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch18
Imelman, J. D. (1978). Plaats en inhoud van een personale pedagogiek. Een bijdrage tot begripsanalytisch en fenomenologisch denken [Place and content of a personal pedagogy. A contribution to definition analytical and phenomenological thinking]. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.
Jefferson, G. (1986). Notes on ‘Latency’ in Overlap Onset. Human Studies, 9, 153–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148125
Kardas Isler, N., Gosen M.N., Willemsen, A. (2024). Hypothetical situations as a pedagogical resource in social studies and history lessons at primary school. International Journal of Educational Research, 125, 1 –17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102315
Kohnstamm, P. A. (1929). Persoonlijkheid in Wording. Schets ener Christelijke Opvoedkunde. H.D. Tjeenk Willink & Zoon N.V.
Koole, T. (2012). Teacher evaluations: Assessing ‘knowing’, ‘understanding’, and ‘doing’. In Evaluating Cognitive Competences in Interaction, ed. by Gitte Rasmussen, Catherine E. Brouwer and Dennis Day. 43–66. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.225.03koo
Langeveld, M. J. (1974). ‘Humanisering’ en Opvoeding. In Moed tot zelfstandigheid. Inleidende opstellen over emancipatie en opvoeding, ed. by Tom Tak, 36–52. Meppel: Boom.
Lee, Y.A. (2007). Third turn position in teacher talk: Contingency and the work of teaching. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(6), 1204–1230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.003
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking Science: Language, Learning and Value. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Lyle, S. (2008). Dialogic Teaching: Discussing Theoretical Contexts and Reviewing Evidence from Classroom Practice. Language and Education, 22(3), 222–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780802152499
Maynard, D. W. (1989). Perspective-Display Sequences in Conversation. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53(2), 91–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570318909374294
Maynard, D. W. (2013). Everyone and No One to Turn To: Intellectual Roots and Contexts for Conversation Analysis. In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnel, and Tanya Stivers, 11–31. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch2
Mehan, H. (1979). “What Time is it, Denise?”: Asking known information questions in classroom discourse. Theory Into Practice, 18(4), 285–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405847909542846
Mehan, H., & Cazden C.B. (2013). ‘The Study of Classroom Discourse: Early History and Current Developments’. Paper presented at the AERA 2013 Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA.
Meirieu, P. (2016). Pedagogiek: De plicht om weerstand te bieden. Culemborg: Phronese.
Mercer, N. (1995). The Guided Construction of Knowledge: Talk Amongst Teachers and Learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800418288
Myhill, D. (2006). Talk, talk, talk: teaching and learning in whole class discourse. Research Papers in Education, 21(1), 19–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671520500445425
Nassaji, H. & Wells G. (2000). What’s the use of ‘triadic dialogue’?: an investigation of teacher-student interaction. Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 376–406. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.3.376
Nystrand, M. (1997). Dialogic Instruction: When Recitation Becomes Conversation. In Opening Dialogue: Understanding the Dynamics of Language and Learning in the English Classroom, ed. by Martin Nystrand, 1–29. New-York/London: Teachers College Press.
Peräkylä, A. (1995). AIDS Counselling: Institutional Interaction and Clinical Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597879
Phillipson, N. & Wegerif R. (2017). Dialogic Education. London/New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315621869
Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 53–95. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511665868.008
Rusk, F., Sahlström F. & Pörn M. (2017). Initiating and carrying out L2 instruction by asking known-answer questions: Incongruent interrogative practices in bi- and multilingual peer interaction. Linguistics and Education, 38, 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.02.004
Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on Conversation, ed. by Gail Jefferson. Malden: Blackwell.
Säfström, C. A. (2011). Rethinking Emancipation, Rethinking Education. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 30(2), 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-011-9227-x
Sahlström, F. (2002). The Interactional Organization of Hand Raising in Classroom Interaction. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 37(2), 47–57.
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence Organization in Interaction: Volume 1: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208
Shepherd, M. A. (2014). The discursive construction of knowledge and equality in classroom interactions. Linguistics and Education, 28, 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2014.08.006
Searle, J. R. (1969). The Structure of Illocutionary Acts. In Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language, ed. by John R. Searle, 54–71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438.006
Sert, O. (2017). Creating opportunities for L2 learning in a prediction activity. System, 70, 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.08.008
Sidnell, J. (2012). “Who knows best?”: Evidentiality and epistemic asymmetry in conversation. Pragmatics and Society, 3(2), 294–320. https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.3.2.08sid
Sidnell, J. & Stivers T. (2013). The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001
Simons, M. & Masschelein J. (2021). Looking After School: A Critical Analysis of Personalization in Education. Leuven: Education, Culture & Society Publishers.
Sinclair, J. M. & Coulthard M. (1975). Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Students. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Soter, A. O., Wilkinson I.A., Murphy K., Rudge L., Reninger K., & Edwards M. (2009). What the discourse tells us: Talk and indicators of high-level comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 47(6), 372–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2009.01.001
Speer, S.A, & Parsons C. (2006). Gatekeeping Gender: Some Features of the Use of Hypothetical Questions in the Psychiatric Assessment of Transsexual Patients. Discourse & Society, 17(6), 785–812. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926506068433
Speer, S.A. (2010). Pursuing views and testing commitments: Hypothetical questions in the psychatric assessment of transsexual patients. In Why Do You Ask? The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by Alice Freed, and Susan Ehrlich, 133–158. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Speer, S.A. (2012). Hypothetical Questions: A Comparative Analysis and Implications for “Applied” vs. “Basic” Conversation Analysis. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(4), 352–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.724987
Ten Have, P. (2007). Doing Conversation Analysis. London: SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208895
Van Lier, L. (1988). The Classroom and the Language Learner. London: Longman.
Waring, H.Z. (2009). Moving Out of IRF (Initiation-Response-Feedback): A Single Case Analysis. Language Learning, 59(4), 796–824. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00526.x
Waring, H.Z. (2011). Learner initiatives and learning opportunities. Classroom Discourse, 2(2), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2011.614053
Wells, G. & Arauz R.M. (2006). Dialogue in the Classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379–428. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1503_3
Willemsen, A., Gosen, M.N., Van Braak, M., Koole, T., & De Glopper, K. (2018). Teachers’ open invitations in whole-class discussions. Linguistics and Education, 45, 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2018.03.001
Willemsen, A., Gosen M.N., Koole T.& De Glopper K. (2019). Teachers’ pass-on practices in whole-class discussions: How teachers return the floor to their students. Classroom Discourse, 11(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2019.1585890
