Investigating the use of talk in middle and secondary classrooms

Abstract

This thesis describes two projects which investigated effects of systematic interventions upon students’ patterns of productive engagement and discussion in group learning contexts. In the first study, the Paideia method was applied with middle school students. In the second study, the framework of Quality Talk and the principles of dialogic teaching were employed with senior school students to encourage their interactions and their questioning skills. In each study, intervention classes were able to be compared with non-intervention classes, and students in both studies also participated through online discussion. Classroom interactions were recorded and coded. In Study 1, it was found that the use of the Paideia method occasioned increased volume and complexity of student responding especially on measures of student-to- student interaction. The complexity of these interactions increased significantly for students in the mid-level and high socioeconomic intervention classes but less so for the students in low socioeconomic classes. Differences between intervention and non- intervention students for classes in the mid-level to high socioeconomic classes achieved statistical significance but not for the low socioeconomic classes. Study 2 investigated the framework Quality Talk and principles of dialogic teaching in assisting students to use question-asking strategies, such as authentic questions, uptake questions, high-level questions, intertextual questions and affective response questions and within a classroom environment that encouraged trust and respect. Results showed students increased their use of authentic questions, uptake questions and high-level questions. In turn, the use of these questions appeared to stimulate more complex dialogue, more reasoning words, dialogic spells (a stretch of discourse starting with a student question and followed subsequently, thought not necessarily immediately, by at least two more student questions) and elaborated explanations (a statement or claim that is based on at least 2 reasons). Further, there was a significant change in writing with students in the intervention classes demonstrating increased writing with a critical analytical stance compared with the writing of students in the non-intervention class. The data from Study 2 showed the effect of a recurring pattern of teaching practice. Analyses revealed that productive student interactions became relatively disrupted through teachers joining into group discussions and immediately asking procedural or managerial questions. When teachers listened to student-to-student interchanges for several minutes before speaking, however, such disruption effects were not evident. It was also found many teachers inconsistently applied dialogic teaching methods but, using different types of feedback to students, appeared to have a positive influence on students’ ability to talk and write with a critical analytical stance. When student discussions were held in groups online rather than in face-to-face groups their use of uptake and high-level questions increased, as did their dialogic spells. Results indicate that interventions to increase dialogic discussion can be effective with secondary students, can transfer from spoken to written work, and can be generated in an online environment. The study’s findings also have implications for professional development for teachers in the use of classroom discussions.