Introduction
Talk is a vital component of a child’s learning and development. It enables children to express themselves. In fact, the ability of a child to talk is one of the most important stages of development of a child. Therefore, the role of talk in learning across the curriculum is of great importance and can contribute to how much and how well a child learns. Teachers are vital in determining a child’s ability to learn.
The type of communication of the teacher determines the role of students in learning. In addition, the type of communication determines the type of learning that children engage in. Therefore, a teacher should not just give special emphasis to the content of lessons.
The teacher should strive to manage the social relations in the classroom (Evertson & Weinstein, 2006, p. 325). Failure to manage the social relations in the classroom would jeopardise progress in learning. It is a fact that the two responsibilities may at times seem to conflict.
Active learning is one of the most efficient forms of learning. Active learning does not imply that the teacher would move about in the classroom. It simply implies that the teacher strives to interrelate and reinterpret new experiences and ideas to the students. In active learning, a teacher may use questions and answers during lessons. In addition, the teacher may also use guided discovery or demonstration.
The teacher strives to use the ideas to change the students’ existing pictures of the world around them (Morris & Mather, 2007, p. 202). The teacher helps the student to construct new knowledge. In so doing, the teacher enhances the knowledge of the students.
Vygotsky and Piaget are some of the major scholars who have shaped social constructivism. Vygotsky (1978, p. 32) claimed that there is a close relationship between intellectual development and psychological development of children. He claimed that learning is a social activity. Therefore, learners usually make use of the input of other people. These may include their peers, parents, friends, or various sources of information.
The teacher is usually the facilitator of the process of learning (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 42). Therefore, Vygotsky underlines the importance of teachers in the students’ ability to learn. However, he does not discount the effect of environmental or cultural factors on the learning ability of a child.
According to Vygotsky, the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is the region that is responsible for learning. Learners navigate through this region with the assistance of other people or sources of information. At the lower level of ZPD, learners can undertake various activities independently. On the other hand, at the higher level of ZPD, learners can only undertake various activities with assistance (Martin, 2011, p. 172).
Therefore, Vygotsky advocated for the use of constructivist teaching. Autonomy of students is one of the major characteristics of constructivist teaching. Teachers who use constructivist teaching permit the responses of students to drive the direction of the lessons.
In addition, they encourage dialogue among the students. Therefore, collaboration and inclusion are some of the major characteristics of constructivist teaching. Constructivist teaching takes a holistic approach to learning (Au, 1998, p. 300).
According to Mercer, there are three types of talks. These include disputational, cumulative, and exploratory talks. In disputational talk, there is so much disagreement between various parties. In addition, the communicating parties make very little attempt to pool resources or offer constructive criticism. In disputational talk, the environment is very competitive instead of being co-operative (Mercer, 2007, p. 54).
On the other hand, people who are in cumulative talk agree with each other. Most children use cumulative talk to share knowledge with other people. However, they share knowledge in an uncritical method. Cumulative talk involves repetition and elaboration of the knowledge of other people who are in the conversation. However, it does not involve critical evaluation of the knowledge of other people (Mercer, 2007, p. 54).
In exploratory talk, people listen actively to other people. They may ask questions to clarify certain information. In addition, exploratory talk involves sharing of relevant information. People may challenge the ideas of other people. However, they must provide reasons for challenging the ideas. The contributions of exploratory talk strive to build on what other people have said before.
In exploratory talk, there is an environment of trust between various people. Therefore, people treat the ideas of other people in the group with respect. In addition, the group has a shared sense of purpose. In exploratory talk, group members encourage other members to contribute. This helps in improving the output of the group. After completing the discussion, the group usually seeks joint decisions (Mercer, 2007, p. 54).
Teachers should ensure that they take a holistic approach to learning. They should provide an environment that enables SEN and EAL students to express themselves clearly. In addition, they should encourage the participation of the students. They should take into consideration the effect of cultural factors on the ability of the students to learn.
The Role of Talk in Learning Maths
The teacher-student interaction determines the ability of students to learn. This is regardless of the subject involved in the lesson. Two types of interactions take place in maths lessons. These include teacher-led interactions and peer group interactions. The socio-cultural account of cognitive development underlines the importance of guidance of children by more knowledgeable people in the society.
Knowledgeable people help in guiding the development of knowledge of the children. Teachers may use several methods to guide the students’ knowledge. Dialogic teaching is one of the major methods that a teacher may use to guide the knowledge of the students. In dialogic teaching, the teacher strives to elicit students’ own ideas on various topics under discussion.
This enables the teacher to formulate teaching methods that would enable the students have a clear understanding of the topic. In dialogic teaching, teachers usually encourage the students to discuss their errors and misunderstandings. This involves extended sequences of dialogue between the teacher and the students. Therefore, teachers usually strive to structure questions that would provoke thoughtful answers.
In addition, the answers provoke more questions. Therefore, the answers do not act as terminal points of the dialogue. Instead, they act as building blocks that help students to understand topics under discussion. Classroom exchanges usually form a coherent line of enquiry. The exchanges are not disconnected.
This method of teaching enables the students to understand complex issues in mathematics (Alexander, 2004, p. 32). In dialogic teaching, it is vital for the teacher to ask the children why they have done various activities. By asking why the students have undertaken various activities, the teacher helps the students to stimulate their own reflective enquiries. This shows how teachers may use language to construct knowledge.
Transcript 1 is a transcript of a teacher-led classroom interaction from a year 2 mathematics lesson. The lesson is about the 5 times table. In the conversation, the teacher asks the students to answer various questions. The teacher appears to be pleased when the children answer questions correctly.
However, the teacher does not allocate any additional time for the students to further expand their thoughts and explain their findings. The teacher uses dialogic teaching in the lesson. The teacher asks the children various questions that involve the multiplication of five with another number. Below is a conversations conversation takes place at the end of the transcript.
Teacher: How do we know if a number is in the five times table?
Child: I just know them.
Teacher: Okay. Is 3004 in the five times table?
Child: No.
Teacher: How do you know that?
Child: Because all the numbers in the five times table have to end with zero or five.
From the conversation, it is clear that the teacher was using dialogic teaching in the lesson. The teacher had initially asked the children several questions that involved the multiplication of five with another number. This enabled them to determine the pattern of numbers that are multiples of five. Therefore, it was easy for the students to determine that numbers that are multiples of five should end with zero or five.
Peer group interaction is the other major type of interaction that occurs in maths lessons. Peer group interaction involves the collaboration of students. Working in groups creates more symmetrical interactions than those that exist in teacher-student interactions. The collaborations may centre on solving various problems.
In addition, the collaboration may focus on practical investigations that may enable the students to relate their mathematical ideas with their environment.
Computer-based activities may provide students with the opportunity to improve their mathematical knowledge. Games that have mathematical problems are the major computer-based activities that may enable the students to improve their mathematical knowledge (Alexander, 2004, p. 32).
Uncooperative talk among students limits the effectiveness of peer group interaction in improving the mathematical knowledge of students. The inability of students to determine what they should do is one of the major factors that lead to uncooperative talk. In addition, the inability to determine what constitutes an effective discussion leads to uncooperative talk.
Usually children do not experience peer group discussions that strive to improve their mathematical knowledge outside school. In addition, most teachers do not guide or train students on how they should undertake various discussions.
Lack of training or guidance limits the ability of students to have reasoned dialogue (Alexander, 2004, p. 33). The ability to construct reasoned arguments and critical examine different explanations are some of the major factors that determine the ability of students to learn and apply mathematics.
The guidance of the teacher may benefit the students in several ways. Guidance would enable the students to gain knowledge on various mathematical operations, terms, and concepts. Teachers should also guide the students on how to communicate.
This ensures that the students work effectively with other students. Teachers should guide students on how they should enquire jointly, reason, negotiate, and share ideas among themselves. However, most teachers do not provide this type of guidance.
Transcript 2 is a transcript of three children in year 2 who have mixed ability. The children engage in different types of talk. Child B and C are clearly explaining the work to Child A. There is an element of disputational talk in the conversation of the three children.
Child C tells Child A, “Here. Use your white board. It is easier if you draw the people and the cakes instead of trying to do it in your head.” In so doing, Child A disputes the method that Child A tries to use to solve the sum.
In some instances, the children are uncritical of each other. The children agree on the method they should use to distribute the cupcakes in solving the sum. This shows that there is an element of cumulative talk in the conversation. In addition, there is an element of exploratory talk in the conversation.
The children agree that since they are working with an even number the solution of the sum would have a remainder. This prompts them to use a board to solve the sum. From the transcript is clear that the children do not have skills on how to communicate effectively in a group. Child B tells Child A, “Stop being a baby.” By calling Child A ‘a baby,’ Child B is being disrespectful towards Child A.
The Role of Talk in Learning Science
Careful communication and representation of ideas is one of the major characteristics of science. Effective communication is vital in for the comprehension and dissemination of the information. Scientists use various means to share ideas.
Diagrams and formulas are some of the major methods that scientists use to share ideas. Disagreements and arguments enable the scientists to challenge and validate ideas (Michaels, Shouse & Schweingruber, 2007, p. 87).
Science teachers should ensure that they do not just use interesting demonstrations and hope that students can somehow understand the underlying scientific concepts. For science lessons to be effective, they must include collaboration and communication. This requires relevant parties to use both spoken and written representations of various scientific concepts.
Since speaking and writing are the major forms of communicating about various scientific concepts in a classroom setting, language has a critical role in teaching and learning science. Language enables students to develop their own scientific thinking without the help of other people.
Teachers should ensure that they support the students in using language to improve their scientific skills (Michaels, Shouse & Schweingruber, 2007, p. 87). This would help the students to understand the language of science.
Talking enables students improves their scientific knowledge. Talking enables science students to express their ideas more clearly. In addition, talk helps in discerning what students know from what they do not know. This is the major reason as to why teachers ask students to explain what they understand about various scientific concepts or terms in their own words.
Since the language of science is very particular, it is vital for teachers to ensure that the give special emphasis on talk. Various scientific words have clear-cut meanings. In addition, science has form of argumentation that is different from the normal form of argumentation. Therefore, it is vital for teachers to help students understand scientific forms of argumentation.
In addition, teachers should help students understand how to differentiate scientific argumentation from normal forms of argumentation. One of the major differences between scientific and normal argumentation, is that in scientific argumentation no party ‘wins’ the argument.
However, in scientific argumentation, people share, process, and learn about various scientific ideas. During scientific argumentation, criticism focuses on various ideas instead of the individuals who present the ideas. This enables scientists to build their scientific knowledge.
Most teachers use the I-R-E sequence in teaching about various subjects. I-R-E refers to “teacher initiation, student response, and teacher evaluation” (Michaels, Shouse & Schweingruber, 2007, p. 89). I-R-E enables teachers to determine students’ prior knowledge about various topics.
It is usually very difficult for students to adapt to the use of a different pattern after learning using the I-R-E sequence for a few years (Lyster, 2007, p. 89). Despite the effectiveness of the I-R-E sequence in teaching various subjects, it is not effective in teaching science.
The inability of the I-R-E sequence to support complex reasoning is one of major factors that limit its effectiveness in teaching science. In addition, the I-R-E sequence does not support and encourage argumentation, which is critical in teaching and learning science (Michaels, Shouse & Schweingruber, 2007, p. 89).
During science lessons, teachers usually ask the students several questions. These questions may not have a ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answer. Teachers should encourage argumentation on the questions. Teachers may ask students whether they agree with the response of other students. If they do not agree, they should state the reasons why they do not agree with the response.
On the other hand, the teacher may ask the students to provide additional information if they agree with the response of other students. Argumentation improves the understanding of students on various scientific concepts or ideas (Alsop & Pedretti, 2004, p. 107).
Teachers may also request the students to use various methods to represent their answers. These may include charts or posters. These representations provide a clear illustration of the thinking of the students. Teachers may provide time for students to process various scientific concepts or ideas before responding to them. This enables students to develop ideas that are more complex.
In addition, providing time for students to process the ideas or concepts increases the number of students who take part in the argumentation. Teachers may also ask questions that attempt to clarify the response of various students. This enables other students in the class to understand the response of the student more clearly.
However, using argumentation to build the knowledge of students is not an easy task. It requires effort, time and patience to enable students to explain their ideas. In addition, building scientific arguments that have evidence is tiresome activity (Alsop & Pedretti, 2004, p. 107).
Transcript 3 is a record of a science experiment. The teacher gave the children toy cars and ramps that have different sizes. The students had to hypothesize which vehicles they felt would travel the furthest and on which ramp. They then tested their hypothesis and recorded their results. From the transcript, it is clear that the students are using argumentation to learn about scientific concepts.
The teacher supports dialogue between the students. This helps the students to develop skills on how to undertake scientific argumentations. The teacher does not term various responses as right or wrong. Instead, he asks the students to provide an explanation for their answers. The teacher asks, “Which ramp do you think will help the car travel the furthest distance?”
After the responses of the students, the teacher asks them, “Why do you think this ramp will help the car travel the furthest distance?” This enables the students to provide a clear explanation on why they chose various ramps. If the children are unable to answer the questions, the teacher gives the time to think about the answer. In so doing, the teacher helps the children to develop complex ideas.
The transcript supports Mercer’s ideas on talk. It shows that the children are consolidating their prior knowledge. This is clearly visible in the part that Child C says, “When I ride my bike on the pavement, it is easy but when I am on the grass it is harder.” This shows that Child C has prior knowledge that helps in consolidating the science ideas from the science experiment.
In addition, the children are also learning from each other via cumulative talk. They use cumulative talk to improve their knowledge. They agree with the responses of other children and add additional information in various parts of their conversation. Child A says, “Yes. If the ramp is smooth, it will help it go far.” Child C responds by saying, “Yes. When I ride my bike on the pavement, it is easy.
However, when I am on the grass it is harder.” Child C uses his prior knowledge to support the views of the Child A. Therefore, the conversation helps the children to build a consensus (Mercer, 1995, p. 104). This ultimately improves their scientific knowledge.
Reflection
Vygotsky’s theory of learning places emphasises the importance of interaction in the cognitive and language development of children. His theories illustrate that children and teachers both play necessary and important roles within learning.
Teachers should ensure encourage dialogue among the students. Dialogue would help in identifying prior knowledge of the students. This would enable the teachers to construct new knowledge in the students.
According to Mercer, there are three types of talks. Talks may be cumulative, disputational, or exploratory. In a classroom setting, all types of talks take place. The efficiency of the types of talks varies with the subjects. Argumentation enables science students to improve their learning abilities. Therefore, it is vital for science students to encourage dialogue among students.
Two types of dialogues take place in a classroom setting. These include teacher-led interactions and peer group interactions. Dialogic teaching enables teachers to determine students’ own ideas on various topics under discussion. Dialogic teaching is vital in teaching science and maths.
In science, various questions may not have a ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answer. Therefore, students should provide a detailed explanation of their responses. The teacher should use the response of students to create argumentations among students.
It is vital for teachers to ensure that they teach students on how to communicate effectively with other students. This would improve the efficiency of peer group interactions in improving the knowledge of the students.
Therefore, this essay has enabled me to appreciate the importance of inclusion in teaching EAL and SEN students. In my future placement, I would ensure that I encourage children to share their views on various issues.
References
Alexander, R 2004, Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk, Dialogos, Cambridge.
Alsop, S & Pedretti, E 2004, Analysing exemplary science teaching, McGraw-Hill International, New York.
Au, KH 1998, ‘Social constructivism and the school literacy learning of students of diverse backgrounds’, Journal of Literary Research, vol. 30. no. 2, pp. 297-319.
Evertson, CM & Weinstein, CS 2006, Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues, Routledge, London.
Lyster, R 2007, Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach, John Benjamins Publishing, Amsterdam.
Martin, D 2011, Elementary science methods: A constructivist approach, Cengage Learning, Belmont, CA.
Mercer, N 1995, The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners, Multilingual Matters, Clevedon.
Mercer, N 2007, Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach, Routledge, London.
Michaels, S, Shouse, AW & Schweingruber, HA 2007, Ready, set, science!: Putting research to work in k-8 science classrooms, National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
Morris, RJ & Mather, N 2007, Evidence-based interventions for students with learning and behavioural challenges, Routledge, London.
Vygotsky, LS 1978, Mind in society: The development of psychological processes, Harvard University press, Cambridge.