The Library

'Being the Teacher': identity and classroom conversation

Tools

Richards, Keith. (2006) 'Being the Teacher': identity and classroom conversation. Applied Linguistics, Vol.27 (No.1). pp. 51-77. ISSN 0142-6001

PDF
WRAP_Richards_Being_the_Teacher_FINAL.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (464Kb)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami041

Abstract

Recent debate on the standard classroom Initiation–Response–Follow-up pattern has focused particular attention on the final move and the contribution it can make to productive interaction in teacher-fronted situations. This paper suggests that current research in this area has tended to exaggerate the pedagogic impact of changes based on specifiable discourse moves, proposing instead an approach to analysis which takes account of the dynamic nature of identity construction and its relationship to the development of ongoing talk. It challenges the view that the concept of classroom conversation is inherently contradictory and, drawing on the work of Zimmerman (1998) related to the broader field of Membership Categorization Analysis, demonstrates how shifts in the orientation to different aspects of identity produce distinctively different interactional patterns in teacher-fronted talk. Using Zimmerman's distinction between discourse, situated and transportable identities in talk, extracts from classroom exchanges from different educational contexts are analysed as the basis for claiming that conversation involving teacher and students in the classroom is indeed possible. The paper concludes with a discussion of the pedagogical implications of this.

Item Type:

Journal Article

Subjects:

L Education > LB Theory and practice of education
B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology

Divisions:

Faculty of Social Sciences > Centre for Applied Linguistics

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):

Teachers -- Attitudes -- Research, Identity (Philosophical concept), Conversation analysis -- Research, Interaction analysis in education

Journal or Publication Title:

Applied Linguistics

Publisher:

Oxford University Press

ISSN:

0142-6001

Official Date:

March 2006

Dates:

Date	Event
March 2006	Published

Volume:

Vol.27

Number:

No.1

Page Range:

pp. 51-77

Identification Number:

10.1093/applin/ami041

Status:

Peer Reviewed

Access rights to Published version:

Restricted or Subscription Access

References:

Bellack, A. A., H. M. Kliebard, R. T. Hyman and F. I. Smith. 1966. The Language of the Classroom. New York: Teachers‘ College Press.
Buzzelli, C. A. and Johnston, B. 2001. ‗Authority, power, and morality in classroom discourse.‘ Teaching and Teacher Education 17: 873-884.
Bye, A. 1991. ‗Classroom research: message-oriented and medium-oriented discourse.‘ LSU Bulletin 2:7-19.
Christie, F. 2002. Classroom Discourse Analysis. A Functional Perspective. London: Continuum.
Cuff, E. C. 1993. Problems of Versions in Everyday Situations. Washington DC: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis & University Press of America.
Cullen, R. 1998. ‗Teacher talk and the classroom context.‘ ELT Journal 52/3: 179-87.
Cullen, R. 2002. ‗Supportive teacher talk: the importance of the F-move.‘ ELT Journal 56/2: 117-27.
Drew, P. 1991. ‗Asymmetries of knowledge in conversational interactions‘ in Marková and Foppa (eds.) pp. 21-48.
Elbaz, F. 1983. Teacher Thinking: A Study of Practical Knowledge. Beckenham: Croom Helm.
Goffman, E. 1974. Frame Analysis. New York: Harper and Row.
Green, J. L. and C. N. Dixon. 1994. ‗Talking knowledge into being: Discursive and social practices in classrooms.‘ Linguistics and Education 5:231-239. (Editors‘ introduction.)
Hall, J. K. and M. Walsh. 2002.‘Teacher-student interaction and language learning.‘ Applied Linguistics 21/3: 376-406.
Heller, M. 1995. ‗Language choice, social institutions and symbolic domination.‘ Language in Society 24/3: 373-405.
Hester, S. and Eglin, P. (eds.). 1997. Culture in Action: Studies in Membership Categorisation Analysis. Washington DC: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis & University Press of America.
Jacoby, S. and Gonzales, P. 1991. ‗The constitution of expert-novice in scientific discourse.‘ Issues in Applied Linguistics 2/2: 149-181.
Jarvis, J. and M. Robinson. 1997. ‗Analysing educational discourse: An exploratory study of teacher response and support to pupils‘ learning.‘ Applied Linguistics 18/2: 213-28.
Johnston, B. 2003. Values in English Language Teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Keppler, A. and Luckmann, T. 1991. ‗―Teaching‖: conversational transmission of knowledge‘ in Marková and Foppa (eds.) pp.143-65.
Kerby, A. 1991. Narrative and the Self. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Lemke, J. L. 1990. Talking Science: Language, Learning and Value. Norwood NJ: Ablex Publishing Company.
Lepper, G. 2000. Categories in Text and Talk. London: Sage.
Lin, A. 2000. ‗Lively children trapped in an island of disadvantage: Verbal play of Cantonese working-class schoolboys in Hong Kong.‘ International Journal of the Sociology of Language 143: 63-83.
Lortie, D. C. 1975. Schoolteacher: A Sociological Study. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Markee, N. 2004a. ‗Zones of interactional transition.‘ The Modern Language Journal 88/4: 583-96.
Markee, N. 2004b. ‗The organization of off-task talk in second language classrooms‘ in K. Richards and P. Seedhouse (eds.): Applying Conversation Analysis. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.197-213.
Marková, I. and Foppa, K. (eds.). 1991. Asymmetries in Dialogue. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Mehan, H. 1979. Learning Lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Montgomery, M. 2001. Defining ‗authentic talk.‘ Discourse Studies 3/4: 397-405.
Murata, K. 1994. Intrusive of co-operative? A cross-cultural study of interruption. Journal of Pragmatics 22/3-4: 385-400.
Nassaji, H. and G. Wells. 2000. ‗What‘s the use of ‗triadic dialogue‘?: An investigation of teacher-student interaction.‘ Applied Linguistics 21/3: 376-406.
Nunan, D.1987. Communicative language teaching: making it work.‘ ELT Journal 41/2: 136-45.
Nystrand, M. 1997. ‗Dialogic instruction: When recitation becomes conversation‘ in M. Nystrand, A Gamoran, R. Kachur and C. Prendergast (eds.): Opening Dialogue: Understanding the Dynamics of Language Learning and Teaching in the English Classroom. New York: Teachers‘ College Press, pp. 1-29.
Psathas, G. 1999. ‗Studying the organization in action: Membership categorization and interaction analysis.‘ Human Studies 22: 139-62.
Rampton, B. 1999. ‗Dichotomies, difference, and ritual in second language learning and teaching.‘ Applied Linguistics 20/3: 316-340.
Sacks, H. 1992a. Lectures on Conversation, Vol. 1, Ed. G. Jefferson. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sacks, H. 1992b. Lectures on Conversation, Vol. 2, Ed. G. Jefferson. Oxford: Blackwell.
Schegloff, E. A. 1987. ‗Between micro and macro: contexts and other connections‘ in J. C. Alexander, B. Giesen, R. Münch & N. J. Smelser (eds.): The Micro-Macro Link. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 207-34.
Seedhouse, P. 1996. ‗Classroom interaction: possibilities and impossibilities.‘ ELT Journal 50/1: 16-24.
Sinclair, J. M. and Coulthard, M. 1975. Towards an Analysis of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tannen, D. 1984. Conversational Style: Analyzing Talk among Friends. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Tracy, K. 2002. Everyday Talk: Building and Reflecting Identities. New York: The Guilford Press.
van Dam van Isselt, H. R. 1995. ‗Where‘s ―the lesson‖ in all this talk? Structural features of classroom floors‘ in E. Huls and J. Klatter-Folmer (eds.): Artikelen van de Tweede Sociolinguistische Conferentie. Delft: Uitgeverij Eburon, pp. 125-38.
van Lier, L. 1996. Interaction in the Language Curriculum. London: Longman.
Vygotsky, L. S. 1962. Thought and Language. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Warren, M. 1993. ‗Towards a Description of the Features of Naturalness in Conversation.‘ Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Birmingham.
Wells, G. 1993. ‗Reevaluating the IRF sequence: A proposal for the articulation of theories of activity and discourse for the analysis of teaching and learning in the classroom.‘ Linguistics and Education 5: 1-27.
Wells, G. 1999. Dialogic Inquiry. Towards a Sociocultural Practice and Theory of Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Willis, J. 1992. ‗Inner and outer: spoken discourse in the language classroom‘ in M. Coulthard (ed.), Advances in Spoken Discourse. London: Routledge, pp. 162-82.
Wilson, J. 1989. On the Boundaries of Conversation. Oxford: Pergamon.
Zuengler, J. and J. Mori (eds). 2002. Applied Linguistics 23(1) special issue: Microanalyses of Classroom Discourse: A Critical Consideration of Method.
Zimmerman, D. H. 1998. ‗Discoursal identities and social identities‘ in C. Antaki and S. Widdicombe (eds.): Identities in Talk. London: Sage, pp.87-106.