Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, Vol 12, No 1 (2015)

Encouraging participation or restraining teasing? Teacher responses to uninvited students’ answers

Inkeri Lehtimaja, Liisa Tainio
Issued Date: 20 May 2019

Abstract


In a second-language classroom, it is beneficial for learning to encourage student participation. However, the teacher has to consider issues of equal participation and moral order. Drawing on a corpus of Finnish as a second language lessons for teenage students and adopting a conversation analytic approach, this article examines situations in which the students produce uninvited, teasing answers on behalf of other students. We focus especially on teacher responses: the teachers either ignore, ratify or sanction the uninvited answers. In our analysis, we show how the participants negotiate the right to answer, and how the teachers take into account the turn-taking rules of classroom interaction and the ongoing pedagogical activity, as well as moral considerations. In the article, ignoring the uninvited answer is treated as a default teacher response, since it corresponds to norms of prototypical classroom interaction. However, the teacher can ratify an uninvited answer if it is useful for pedagogical purposes, or s/he can sanction an uninvited answer if it is unacceptable for classroom talk or if the target of the teasing turn displays embarrassment. While participating in pedagogical activities, the students pursue their own social goals at the same time. This social dimension can promote learning but needs to be handled with care by the teacher.

Download Media

PDF (Price: £17.50 )

DOI: 10.1558/jalpp.36883

References


Cromdal, J. and Tholander, M. (2012) Morality in professional practice. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice 9 (2): 155–164. https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.v9i2.25734

Drew, P. (1987) Po-faced receipts of teases. Linguistics 25 (1): 219–253. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1987.25.1.219

Gardner, R. (2013) Conversation analysis in the classroom. In J. Sidnell and T. Stivers (eds) The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, 593–611. Chichester,UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Goffman, E. (1981) Forms of Talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Goodwin, C. and Goodwin, M. H. (2004) Participation. In A. Duranti (ed.) A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology, 222–244. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Hazel, S. and Mortensen, K. (2017) The classroom moral compass – participation, engagement and transgression in classroom interaction. Classroom Discourse 8 (3): 214–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2017.1282881

Hellermann, J. (2003) The interactive work of prosody in the IRF exchange: Teacher repetition in feedback moves. Language in Society 32 (1): 79–104. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404503321049

Karlsson, F. (1999) Finnish: An Essential Grammar. London: Routledge.

Keltner, D., Capps, L., Kring, A. M., Young, R. C. and Heerey, E. A. (2001) Just teasing: A conceptual analysis and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin 127 (2): 229–248. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.229

Lehtimaja, I. (2011) Teacher-oriented address terms in reproach sequences. Linguistics and Education 22 (4): 348–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2011.02.008

McHoul, A. (1978) The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society 7 (2): 183–213. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500005522

Mehan, H. (1979) Learning Lessons: Social Organization in the Classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674420106

Sahlström, F. (1999) Up the Hill Backwards: On Interactional Constraints and Affordances for Equity-Constitution in the Classrooms of the Swedish Comprehensive School. Uppsala: Uppsala University.

Schegloff, E. A. (2007) Sequence Organization in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni­versity Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208

Schwab, G. (2011) From dialogue to multilogue: A different view on participation in the English foreign-language classroom. Classroom Discourse 2 (1): 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2011.562654

Seedhouse, P. (2004) The Interactional Architecture of the Language Classroom: A Con­versation Analysis Perspective. Oxford: Blackwell.

Sidnell, J. and Stivers, T. (eds) (2013) The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Tainio, L. (2011) Gendered address terms in reproach sequences in classroom interaction. Linguistics and Education 22 (4): 330–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2010.09.004

Tholander, M. and Aronsson, K. (2002) Teasing as serious business: Collaborative staging and response work. Text 22 (4): 559–595. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2002.022

Waring, H. Z. (2008) Using explicit positive assessment in the language classroom: IRF, feedback, and learning opportunities. The Modern Language Journal 92 (4): 577–594. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00788.x

Waring, H. Z. (2011) Learner initiatives and learning opportunities in the language classroom. Classroom Discourse 2 (2): 201–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2011.
614053


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.





Equinox Publishing Ltd - 415 The Workstation 15 Paternoster Row, Sheffield, S1 2BX United Kingdom
Telephone: +44 (0)114 221-0285 - Email: info@equinoxpub.com

Privacy Policy