PRIMARY TEACHERS’ TALK AND MODALITY USE IN BRUNEIAN SCIENCE CLASSROOMS
Dr. Roslinawati Mohd Roslan,
[email protected] Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah Institute of Education, Universiti Brunei Darussalam
INTRODUCTION •Multimodal science teaching •Which modes are most apt
•Dialogic talk •Investigate teachers’ talk and modality use
•Challenges faced •The usage of English in Science learning
RESEARCH QUESTIONS? 1) How do Bruneian primary science teachers orchestrate science discourse in their classrooms? a) How can each of the Bruneian primary science teacher’s discourse be described in terms of Mortimer and Scott’s authoritative-dialogic continuum? b) What kinds of modalities are used by each Bruneian primary teacher to teach science concepts in the classrooms?
2) What, if any, patterns of discourse and modality use can be described across the primary science classrooms?
STUDY DESIGN FIVE - primary science teachers were recorded using video recorders
ALL – female teachers from primary schools located in Brunei Muara District
TWO-TEN years – teaching experiences. Teachers participated voluntarily
TEN – science lessons were coded •Mortimer & Scott (2003) framework •Nichols et al.’s (2008) framework
Mortimer & Scott’s (2003) Framework on 4 Communicative Approaches Communicative Approach Categories Interactive/Author itative
The teacher leads students through a sequence of questions and answers with the aim of reaching one specific point of view.
Interactive/ Dialogic
Non-Interactive/ Authoritative
The teacher and students explore ideas, generating new meanings, posing genuine questions and The teacher offering, listening to and presents one working on different specific point of points of view. For view. For example example teacher asks through lectures. students to elaborate on their answers and invite all students to discuss together.
Non-Interactive/ Dialogic
The teacher considers various points of view, setting out, exploring and working on the different perspectives. For example teacher discusses the students’ point of view with the whole class.
Modality framework from Nichols et al. (2008) 1. Teacher Verbal Language Modes
2. Teacher Student Verbal Language Modes
3. Visual-Graphical Modes
4. Gestural-Kinaesthetic Modes
5. Material-Operational Modes
Patterns of Discourse, Prompts Used, IRE Patterns of Exchange and Modality Use • Teachers’ talk were coded using four kinds of CA • Teachers’ feedback in the form of prompts were coded • Initiation-Response-Evaluation patterns of exchange were coded • Modes were identified • All of these were quantified as follows: Proportion in an episode = Number of IRE/CA/Prompts/Modalities used x 100% ÷ by Total number of transcript lines in an episode
Theoretical Frameworks Sociocultural Theory of Teaching and Learning by Vygotsky (1962, 1986)
Social Semiotics Theory (Kress, 2009)
Sociocultural Theory of Teaching & Learning Science (Vygotsky)
Personal plane
Social plane
Language and other means of communication
Internalisation: with structuring
Language as a tool for thinking
Social Semiotics Theory (Kress, 2009)
Takes into account the other modes of communication or “signs” in making meaning in a social context; .
Kress defines modes in two ways: what a
community takes
MODE
to be a mode and demonstrates that in its practices; it is a matter for the community, and it’s representational needs.
The second definition of “mode” in a social semiotic framework should fulfil three functions:
IDEATIONAL
INTERPERSONAL
TEXTUAL
• To represent what is going on in the world
• To bring about interactions and relations between people
• To form communicatively meaningful whole entities or
texts
“meaning
resides in the combined effects of the orchestration of the modes by the producer and the reproducer, in the interaction between what is said, what is shown; the posture adopted, the movements made, and the position of the speaker and the audience relative to each other in the interaction” (Kress et al. 2001, p. 14).
RESULTS
Teacher 1 (Mudi’s lessons) Variable
Episode 1 (%)
Episode 2 (%)
Episode 3 (%)
13.5 13.5 4.3 0 0
13.3 13.3 5 8.3 0
10.9 0 0 28.2 0
LESSON 1 IRE Interactive/authoritative Non-interactive/authoritative Interactive/dialogic Non-interactive/dialogic Variable LESSON 2 IRE Interactive/authoritative Non-interactive/authoritative Interactive/dialogic Non-interactive/dialogic
Episode 1 (%)
Episode 2 (%)
Episode 3 (%)
Episode 4 (%)
18.4 18.4 0 0 0
23.5 23.5 5.9 0 0
15.4 0 0 15.4 2.6
20 0 10 20 0
Teacher 2 (Sarimah’s Lessons) Variable
Episode 1 (%)
Episode 2 (%)
Episode 3 (%)
5.1 0 0 37.5 0 Episode 1 (%)
6.1 0 0 28.6 0 Episode 2 (%)
8.2 0 0 26 0 Episode 3 (%)
33.3 33.3 0 0 0
16.7 16.7 0 0 0
27.3 27.3 0 0 0
LESSON 1 IRE Interactive/authoritative Non-interactive/authoritative Interactive/dialogic Non-interactive/dialogic Variable LESSON 2 IRE Interactive/authoritative Non-interactive/authoritative Interactive/dialogic Non-interactive/dialogic
Teacher 3 (Kathy’s Lessons) Variable LESSON 1 IRE Interactive/authoritative Non-interactive/authoritative Interactive/dialogic Non-interactive/dialogic Variable LESSON 2 IRE Interactive/authoritative Non-interactive/authoritative Interactive/dialogic Non-interactive/dialogic
Episode 1 (%)
Episode 2 (%)
Episode 3 (%)
Episode 4 (%)
14.6 14.6 10.4 0 0 Episode 1 (%)
28.6 28.6 7.1 0 0 Episode 2 (%)
23.9 23.9 2.2 0 0 Episode 3 (%)
26.7 26.7 6.7 0 0 Episode 4 (%)
11.1 11.1 0 0 0
2 0 6 2 0
13.6 13.6 1.5 0 0
14.9 14.9 0 0 0
Teacher 4 (Wawa’s Lessons) Variable
LESSSON 1 IRE Interactive/authoritative Non-interactive/authoritative Interactive/dialogic Non-interactive/dialogic Variable LESSON 2 IRE Interactive/authoritative Non-interactive/authoritative Interactive/dialogic Non-interactive/dialogic
Episode 1 (%) 12.2 0 0 12.2 0
Episode 2 (%) 15.4 15.4 23.1 0 0 Episode 1 (%) 6.5 6.5 0 0 0
Episode 3 (%)
Episode 4 (%)
20 18.2 20 18.2 13.3 10.6 0 0 0 0 Episode 2 Episode 3 (%) (%) 6.7 6.7 4.8 0 0
5.3 5.3 26.3 0 0
Episode 5 (%) 15.5 15.5 10.3 0 0 Episode 4 (%) 8.7 8.7 4.3 2.2 0
Teacher 5 (Rainah’s Lessons) Variable
Episode 1 (%)
Episode 2 (%)
Episode 3 (%)
LESSON 1 IRE interactive/authoritative non-interactive/authoritative interactive/dialogic non-interactive/dialogic Variable LESSON 2 IRE interactive/authoritative non-interactive/authoritative interactive/dialogic non-interactive/dialogic
Episode 1 (%)
4.9 0 0 19.5 0 Episode 2 (%)
11.5 11.5 1.9 0 0 Episode 3 (%)
4.5 0 0 18.2 0 Episode 4 (%)
15.6 15.6 0 0 0
25.6 25.6 0 0 0
22.4 22.4 0 0 0
31.3 31.3 4.2 0 0
Prompts Used Across All Teachers
Discussion • More modalities augments the authoritative talk • Prompting students to give more answers fosters dialogic talk
Implications of the Study
AWARENESS
TRAINING
References Kress, G. (2009). What is mode? In Jewitt, C. (Eds.). The Routledge handbook of multimodal Analysis (pp. 58-67). London: Routledge. Kress, G., Charalampos, T., Jewitt, C., & Ogborn, J. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. Continuum International Publishing Group. Mortimer, E. F. and Scott, P.H. (2003). Meaning Making in Secondary Science Classrooms. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Nichols, K. Barton, G., Van Rooy, W., Freebody, P., Hedberg, J.(2008). Investigating the use of technology and modalities in Queensland senior Biology: Applying multiple coding frameworks to classroom observations. In Proceedings of the Annual Association of Asian Science Education, (a67dc01d73). Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Roslan, R. (2014). Primary Teachers Talk’ in the Bruneian Context: Representational Fluency and Consequences for Science Classrooms, PhD Thesis, University of Queensland. Available at http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:329586
