Teacher Talk Enhances Learning

The 9th Australasian Institute of Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis Conference (November 20th & 22nd), the University of Waikato.

When quantitative and qualitative research methods are used quite often it can result in better insights. In this case dual analysis appears to reinforce the COR Literacy Framework notion that teacher talk contributes to student learning at three levels.

I recently had the privilege of presenting at this conference held in Hamilton, New Zealand. Hamilton is a beautiful city situated along the Waikato River (see the river walk in the picture). The city's Hamilton Gardens, which won the International Garden of the Year - 2014 award for their internationally unique concept of telling 'The Story of Gardens' (in picture), is well worth a visit. Although New Zealand and Australia are close, I noticed many contrasting details. In Kiwiland the grass and the gum trees are greener and more uniform. The farms are neater with huge hedges instead of barbed wire fences enclosing them.

Associate Professor Rod Gardner (an accomplished author and researcher in the field of conversational analysis) and I presented some preliminary findings from our continuing research centred around the COR Literacy Framework. In the research project we video taped six small group lessons using three camcorders and two voice recorders. There were two teachers trained in using the COR Literacy Framework who consented to teach three small group lessons each. Some of the recordings have been transcribed and coded according to conversational analysis conventions. This methodology is quite a contrast to my previous research where my perspective has been from a cognitive psychology approach. The cognitive psychology methodology is primarily a top-down approach based on theoretical assumptions whereas the CA methodology is a bottom-up approach that attempts to make no prior assumptions but is more concerned with close observation of meaningful conversations.

The presentation of our ongoing research project was in two parts: I presented the background to the COR Literacy Framework and the research findings to date from a cognitive psychology perspective and Assoc. Prof. Gardner presented the preliminary findings using  the Conversational Analysis methodology.  One of the research questions was: Do good teachers focus their questions on the three COR levels: perception (factual), cognitive, and metacognitive? At this stage we are beginning to see that this is the case and that this happens in various ways and over relatively short segments of time and sometimes this can be over more extended segments.

COR Literacy Framework Pt 3a - Questions

In teaching, questions are like seeds that fall on fertile ground and germinate. They focus attention and they anticipate the types of meanings that are most likely to be constructed when answering them. The National Reading Panel (2002) investigation of recent reading research found that asking and answering questions were two of the most powerful reading comprehension strategies. One the most important elements of the COR Literacy Framework is the strategic use of questioning. This is because getting answers to questions is at the heart of comprehension. Obviously, you are more able to build better comprehension if you ask the most appropriate questions.

From research conducted in conjunction with the COR Literacy Framework a number of Australian schools found that most children were not able to ask strategic questions when given the opportunity in class. They could often ask literal or surface level questions such as 'what', 'when' or 'where'  questions but seldom asked 'why' or 'how'. It was assumed that the children were used to answering questions and were not usually required to ask questions in class. The impression that children often have is that the most powerful person in the classroom, the teacher, usually asks all the questions. However, by giving the children the responsibility for devising their own questions the teacher is actually transferring the learning responsibility to the children. This is often referred to as transferring the locus of control and it is one contributing factor for developing learning self-regulation.

Good self-questioning needs to be modelled and practiced by individuals on a regular basis. Teachers should develop a habit of asking higher order questions during class discussions so that the children become familiar with the various types of questions that can be generated. When teachers actively promote discussion in class using open ended questions it promotes divergent thinking, creativity and enjoyment in an atmosphere of inquiry. This will provide fertile ground for the children to explore learning by seeking to ask their own questions when given the opportunity.

One way to scaffold questioning for the children is to provide question stem cue cards that give a sample beginning of different question types for the children to use as a guide. For example, "How do you think...?" or "Why do you think that...?" It is, however, not just a matter of providing a random set of question stems for children to choose from but explicitly teaching when and how they can be used most effectively.

In the COR Literacy Framework there are three levels of questions that are related to the three cognitive or thinking levels. At the surface level (stepping foreword) the question will have a literal focus and will relate to factual knowledge. They will also relate to the decoding process. For example, self-questioning such as "Is this making sense?" or "Does this sound right?" will focus on the confirming or correcting during the reading process.

At the deeper level (stepping into) the questions will often relate to making connections of old knowledge with the new knowledge to enable comprehension and create new meaning.  The QAR (question-answer relationship) strategy (Raphael, 1984) is a particularly good method to demonstrate to students that not all the answers can be found in the text, whether they are literal or inferential. It requires students to connect text information to their prior knowledge.

Students need to ask:

1.     Is the answer right there in the text? Answers to literal questions can be answered there in the text.

2.   Do I need to think and Search the text? The answer is in the text but the reader must tie it together from two or more sentences in the passage.

3.   Is the answer found in my head? The answer is not in the text. The reader needs to use his/her own background experiences to answer the question. Is there a part of this text that reminds me of something else I have read? or Is there a part of the text that reminds me of something else?

4.   Is the answer a combination of the author and me? The answer is not in the passage. It is found in the reader’s own prior knowledge and also from the text.

The questions that you ask will anticipate the type of information that you are seeking. This is a type of stepping back - it is a metacognitive process that operates at the third cognitive level. They focus attention and act as anticipation guides. This self-regulating process usually enhances the efficiency of  the stepping forward and stepping into processes.

After thought:
I have recently been reading several blogs or articles about exploring a problem first before researching possibles ways to solve the problem.  Why not explore a problem first using background knowledge and intuition and then devise questions (goals) to research and find possible solutions. Go to
http://meaning2mean.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/three-examples-of-creativity-through.html

For some question ideas go visit my Pinterest site:
http://www.pinterest.com/garywoolley/reading-comprehension-ideas/

References:

National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: Report of the comprehension instruction subgroup to the National Institute of Child Health and Development. Washington, DC: NICD.

Raphael, T. E. (1984). Teaching learners about sources of information for answering questions. The Reading Teacher, 28, 303-311.