Transcript Guidance in the context of shared experience: the role of

Guidance in the context of shared
experience: the role of interaction in
language and literacy development
Clare Painter
University of Sydney
ISFC 2012
1
our predisposition to teach
• a back-up strategy has survived in the many species
that are specifically social: the same lifelong chemistryplus-environment strategy that results in children who
are primed to learn also results in adults who are
primed to teach. The selective sensitivity of the child
gets tuned to a reliable source of information, reliable
because that source -- other people in its community -has similarly evolved to provide just that kind of
information (e.g. about the local language in use in the
community in that generation). The child sets off a
teacher-response in adults just as adults set off a
learner-response in children (this is stronger the
younger the children are) (Lemke, 1995:160 [emphasis
added]).
2
outline
• Oral language development: orientations
discouraging an interest in the adult role
• Evidence from SFL case studies on the role
of interaction and adult guidance
• Reflections on interaction in literacy
education
3
why does the ‘teaching’ role of the
adult get effaced ?
• the ‘nativist’ orientation from linguistics
• Chomsky (LAD), Fodor, Bickerton (protolanguage), Gleitman (‘syntactic bootstrapping’,
Hyams (parameters) Pinker (‘semantic bootstrapping’)
– language is separate from cognition – grows and matures like any bodily
organ
– only role of environment is ‘triggering input’ for the innate ‘language
acquisition device’
– mother tongue is impervious to teaching
4
MacNeill’s example
Child:
Nobody don't like me.
Mother: No, say 'nobody likes me'.
Child:
Nobody don't like me.
(Eight repetitions of this exchange)
Mother: No, now listen carefully; say
'nobody likes me'.
Child:
Oh! Nobody don't likes me.
McNeill, D. (1966 p.69)
5
“There is surprisingly little evidence that reinforcement, or
indeed any sustained form of explicit teaching plays an
important role in language learning. Indeed there exists
some experimental evidence which suggests that explicit
instruction in the child’s first language fails to be
facilitating.”
Foder, J.A, Bever, T.G. & Garret, M.F. The psychology of
language 1974: 455
6
why does the ‘teaching’ role of the
adult get effaced ?
• the
constructivist orientation from psychology
Jean Piaget
1896-1980
- children construct their own knowledge from interaction
and play with the material environment
‘discovery learning’ (cf Rousseau)
- stage theory of cognitive development: ‘readiness’ is all
“each time one prematurely teaches a child something he
could have discovered for himself, the child is kept from
inventing it and consequently from understanding it
completely” (cited in PH Mussen (ed) (1970: 715)
- language simply follows on from self-managed cognitive development
- development is from ‘radical egocentrism’ to gradually becoming social
7
SFL
8
SFL case studies of first language development
in the home
Halliday,
1975
Learning how to Mean
Nigel 0;9 – 2;9
Painter, 1984
Into the mother tongue
Hal 0;9 – 2;9
Torr, 1997
From Child Tongue to
Mother Tongue
Anna 0;9 – 2;7
Painter, 1999
Learning through language
in early childhood
Stephen 2;7 – 5;0
Derewianka, B (2003) ‘Grammatical metaphor in the transition to adolescence.’ In
Simon-Vandenbergen, A M et al (eds) Grammatical Metaphor: Views from Systemic
Functional Linguistics Amsterdam / Philadelphia PA, Benjamins: 142-165
9
some recurring themes from SFL case studies
• child is developing a resource for ‘making sense’ of experience
(learning language while learning through language)
• the child’s language follows a developmental trajectory:
• protolanguage  transition  phase III (into language)
• generalisation, abstraction, metaphor (with language)
• child’s strategies for learning are ‘semantic strategies’ (cognition
as meaning)
10
equally important
“The learning of the mother tongue is also an interactive
process. It takes the form of the continued exchange of
meanings between the self and others. The act of
meaning is a social act.”
Halliday (1975:140/ 2004: 301)
11
drawing on…
Human selves are born not as individuals but as
sociable persons seeking other human selves …
Trevarthen 2009: 511
in a (pre-linguistic) ‘proto-conversation’
Both actors, adult and infant …move together
in dialogue, alternating and synchronizing
moves to generate cycles of …address and
reply… (Trevarthen 2009: 512)
the mother’s voice “draws the infant
consciousness into attentive focused states, leads
to alternation of messages and leaves lasting
impressions” Trevarthen 2009: 514)
12
1.
baby Emma at 6 mo.
M involves her in ‘clap handies’ game
2.
boldly trying out on a new person…
3. … but when “uncomprehending, he
responds with a sarcastic laugh” she
lowers her head and eyes in a classic
gesture of shame
Trevarthen, C 1998:40
13
Halliday, 1980: the adult as ‘tracker’
“The caregivers not only exchange meanings with the child, they also
construe the system along with him…
[refers to Condon’s use of the term ‘tracking’ in relation to speakers’
monitoring each other’s contributions]
…Now when we come to study the infant’s language development we
find the concept of ‘tracking’ is fundamental here too. Not only do the
caregivers track the process, [i.e. text] they also track the system. Child
and adult share in the creation of language. The mother knows where
the child has got to (subconsciously; she is not aware she has this
knowledge, as a rule), because she is construing the system along with
him; she brings it into play receptively, and stores it alongside her own
more highly developed system -- which had been construed along
similar lines in the first place”
Halliday (1980/2004:199) ‘The contribution of developmental linguistics to the
interpretation of language as system.’
14
tracking is in order to interact and guide effectively
15
guiding into dialogue
(1;1;15) (M switches light on)
H:
da!
M:
That’s the light, isn’t it? the light
(1;2;0)
M:
Where’s the light? Where’s the light?
(H looks at her intently, then up at light)
M:
It’s there, isn’t it?
Where’s the light?
H:
dja (points at looks at light)
M:
Yes
H:
(points) da
M:
Yes, clever boy
H:
da; da; da; dja; da (points at another light)
M:
Mm, that one’s not on
16
guiding into dialogue
the ‘standard action format’ (Ninio & Bruner, 1978)
M:
C:
M:
C
M:
C:
M:
C:
M:
Look!
(attentional vocative)
(touches picture)
What are those?
(query)
(vocalises and smiles)
Yes, they are rabbits (feedback and label)
(vocalises, smiles, looks up at M)
(laughs) Yes, rabbit (feedback and label)
(vocalises, smiles)
Yes (laughs)
(feedback)
cf Brown – the original word game; the ‘naming game’
17
Theorised in terms of Vygotsky’s ideas and described
as “scaffolding”
“steps taken to reduce the degrees of freedom taken
in carrying out some task so that the child can
concentrate on the difficult skill she is in the process
of acquiring” (Bruner, 1978: 19)
here – attending to the picture, attending to the name, taking a dialogic turn
18
Lev Vygotsky
1896-1934
1934 Thought and Language
1962 Translated into English
1980s Beginnings of take-up in English
speaking world
–
– language (and therefore social interaction) mediates
cognitive development
– learning takes place in the ‘zone of proximal development’ (ZPD)
• region between learner’s level when performing solo in some task and the
level that can be achieved under adult guidance or in collaboration with
more capable peers
– the developmental trajectory is from ‘inter-mental’ (mediated by
speech) to ‘intra-mental’ (contra Piaget)
• “That which the child is able to do in collaboration today, he will be able to do
independently tomorrow” (Vygotsky, 1978: 216-7
– learning in the ZPD is enabled by more expert others through
‘scaffolding’ (Wood, Bruner and Ross, 1976) and ‘guided
participation’ (Rogoff, 1990)
19
scaffolding: the asymmetrical dyad
20
interacting with books
(1;8; 11) (pushing an open picture book at M)
H: Doing; doing (demanding tone)
M: (puzzled at first) Oh; what’s he doing? Is that what I say?
H: (beams)
M: So, what’s he doing?...
(2;1;23) (H looks at a picture book by himself)
H: What’s that? (pointing at picture)
-- Train
-- No. What’s that?
-- Tusk
-- That’s right. TUSK!
(2;1;23)
history of shared experience allows adult to pass conversational ball back
language comes to consciousness in process of being learned
adult language gets appropriated – here at level of discourse
21
the ‘naming game’ continues
2;7;1 (M and S Looking at a picture book)
DK1
K2
DK1
K2
K1
DK1
K2
K1
K1
K2f
K1
K2f
I
R
I
R
E/F
I
R
E/F
M:
S:
M:
S:
M:
And do you remember what that is?
Mm
What is it?
It’s a house
It’s a house, special house.
And what’s it made of?
S: Oh (pause) snow.
M: Yes, that’s right;
It’s made of ice
S: Made of ice
M: And it’s called igloo.
S: Igloo
attentional
query
feedback and label
query
feedback and
(‘recasting’ label)
feedback with label
shared experience: of the genre, involving typical ‘pedagogical’ exchanges
22
2;7;1 (M and S Looking at a picture book)
DK1
K2
DK1
K2
K1
DK1
K2
K1
K1
K2f
K1
K2f
I
R
I
R
E/F
I
R
E/F
M:
S:
M:
S:
M:
And do you remember what that is?
Mm
What is it?
It’s a house
It’s a house, special house.
And what’s it made of?
S: Oh (pause) snow.
M: Yes, that’s right;
It’s made of ice
S: Made of ice
M: And it’s called igloo.
S: Igloo
attentional
query
feedback and label
query
feedback and
(‘recasting’ label)
feedback with label
shared experience: of the genre, involving typical ‘pedagogical’ exchanges
of the text (do you remember?)
23
2;7;1 (M and S Looking at a picture book)
DK1
K2
DK1
K2
K1
DK1
K2
K1
K1
K2f
K1
K2f
I
R
I
R
E/F
I
R
E/F
M:
S:
M:
S:
M:
And do you remember what that is?
Mm
What is it?
It’s a house
It’s a house, special house.
And what’s it made of?
S: Oh (pause) snow.
M: Yes, that’s right;
It’s made of ice
S: Made of ice
M: And it’s called igloo.
S: Igloo
attentional
query
feedback and label
query
feedback and
(‘recasting’ label)
feedback with label
shared experience: of the genre, involving typical ‘pedagogical’ exchanges
of the text (do you remember?)
adult talks about language it’s called…
24
2;7;1 (M and S Looking at a picture book)
DK1
K2
DK1
K2
K1
DK1
K2
K1
K1
K2f
K1
K2f
I
R
I
R
E/F
I
R
E/F
M:
S:
M:
S:
M:
And do you remember what that is?
Mm
What is it?
It’s a house
It’s a house, special house.
And what’s it made of?
S: Oh (pause) snow.
M: Yes, that’s right;
It’s made of ice
S: Made of ice
M: And it’s called igloo.
S: Igloo
attentional
query
feedback and label
query
feedback and
(‘recasting’ label)
feedback with label
shared experience: of the genre, involving typical ‘pedagogical’ exchanges
of the text (do you remember?)
adult talks about language it’s called…
adult offers new language for appropriation
25
2;8;29
S: Look Mummy baa baa black sheep
M: Oh, that’s not a sheep, that’s a dog with a woolly coat.
It’s called a poodle. Poodle.
S: Oh, poodle
(later)
S: That’s not a lamb, no
26
SFL: the text – system relation
• “…From acts of meaning children construe the
system of language, while at the same time, from the
system, they engender acts of meaning. When
children learn language they are simultaneously
processing text into language and activating language
into text”
(Halliday [1993] 2004: 341)
27
instantiation
The relation between the meaning potential as a
whole and the particular choices of meanings,
wordings and soundings actualised in an individual
text, on a specific occasion
‘system’ (potential)
instance (text)
‘act of meaning’
28
instances from which the child construes the
system are jointly constructed
What’s it made of?
Oh. Snow
Yes, that’s right,
it’s made of ice
Made of ice
And it’s called igloo
Igloo
29
In interaction: simultaneous creation of text and construal of system
What’s it made of?
Oh. Snow
Yes, that’s right,
it’s made of ice
Made of ice
And it’s called igloo
Igloo
‘system’
(potential)
instance (text)
30
the system (the climate)…[is] the pattern set up by the
instances (the weather), and each instance, no matter how
minutely, perturbs these probabilities and so changes the
system (or keeps it as it is, which is just the limiting case of
changing it.
(Halliday 1992: 26/ 2002: 359)
31
scaffolding monologue on the basis of
shared experience
32
Scaffolding stories
(Nigel, around 1;9, recalling an outing with Mum)
N: Bumblebee
M: Where was the bumblebee?
N: Bumblebee on train
M: What did Mummy do?
N: Mummy open window
M: Where did the bumblebee go?
N: Bumblebee flew away
(Halliday, 1975: 99)
Adult takes on burden of sequencing and structuring
Child contributes events
33
(2;0)
(H returns from shopping trip with F)
H: Stick!
M: (baffled) Stick, eh?
H: Horse
M: Oh, you’ve had a ride on a horse (a routine
shopping mall event)
H: Ride on horsey; ride on horsey ‘gain!
adult ‘recasts’ child’s initiation to clarify it
child extends meaning
(2;1;24)
(H has spent day with M)
F: Where did you go today?
H: To beach
F: What did you do?
adult scaffolds with relevant Q
H: (silence)
child responds and extends meaning
M: Did you get wet?
H: Yes, girl got all wet too. Crying
34
upping the ante
Nigel:
F:
Nigel:
F:
Nigel:
Try eat lid
What tried to eat the lid?
Try eat lid
What tried to eat the lid?
Goat… man said no… goat try eat lid… man said no
(Later)
Nigel: Goat try eat lid…man said no.
M:
Why did the man say no?
Nigel: Goat shouldn’t eat lid (shaking his head no) good for it.
M:
The goat shouldn’t eat the lid. It’s not good for it
Nigel: Goat try eat lid… man said no…goat shouldn’t eat lid
(shaking his head] good for it
(Halliday, 1975: 112)
35
So far…
examples of adult scaffolding
into dialogue
(proto-conversations, protolanguage exchanges, shared observations)
into the pedagogic genre of the naming game
into monologue (recounts and anecdotes)
all enabled by shared experience
36
The direction of adult guidance?
37
guiding the child to reflect on the meaning system
1. semantic categories
2;7;9 (talking about recent outing)
S: That baby cry- crying
M: Yes, it was; well babies do cry a lot when they’re little
2;7;3
S: That dog got a shaky tail
M: Yes, dogs wag their tails when they’re happy
2;8;12 (M and S looking at a picture book about circus)
S: Is that the clown?
M: Yes; that’s the clown ‘cause he’s got a big red nose; clowns often
have red noses
38
guiding the child to reflect on the meaning system
1. semantic categories
2;7;9 (talking about recent outing)
S: That baby cry- crying
M: Yes, it was; well babies do cry a lot when they’re little
2;7;3
S: That dog got a shaky tail
M: Yes, dogs wag their tails when they’re happy
2;8;12 (M and S looking at a picture book about circus)
S: Is that the clown?
M: Yes; that’s the clown ‘cause he’s got a big red nose; clowns often
have red noses
the role of adult elaborating responses in making adult system ‘visible’
39
that
baby
was
crying
Reference to tangible
entity
babies
cry
Reference
to generic
category
unique
e.g. Mary
unique
e.g. Mary
specific
e.g. that baby
specific
e.g. that baby
generic
e.g. babies
child’s system being instantiated
adult’s system being construed
40
Solo efforts a year later – reflecting on categories
(3;7;5) (S talking to M about the ‘big shoes’ at the door)
S: Hal has [big shoes] and you have and Daddy has; grown-ups have
(i) self elaborations on adult model
(3;8;1)
M: …dogs are animals
S: No, they aren’t; dogs aren’t animals
M: Well, what’s an animal then?
(ii) interactive explorations
S: Um, giraffes are animals
M: Oh, I see, you think animal is only for zoo animals
S: Yeah
(3;8;7) S looking at animal jigsaw puzzle pieces)
S: There isn’t a fox [i.e. on jigsaw]; and there isn’t – is a platypus an animal?
(3;8;14) M and H have been talking about dolphins being mammals)
S: Are seals dolphins?
M: No, but seals are mammals too; they aren’t fish
41
Guiding the child to reflect on the meaning system
2. using definitions
2;8;18 (S has been singing Mary had a little lamb)
S: Fleece, not feece, no; not teece; not teece (laughing)
M: No, not teeth
F: (sings) Teeth were as white as snow
S: No, not teeth, fleece
M: Yes, fleece; fleece is the wool on the lamb.
All the lamb’s soft wool is called the fleece
S: (No response)
2;11;15 (S overhears the word pet in talk between M and brother)
S: What’s a pet?
M: A pet is an animal who lives in your house: Katy’s our pet.
(later same day)
S: What’s a pet called?
42
compare
That
is
a pet
Ref. to material entity
=
name/category
‘ostensive definition’
A pet
name/category
is
=
an animal who lives in your house
category
linguistic definition
43
Solo efforts a year later – reflecting on language
(3;7;5) (S in bath about to be shampoo-ed)
M: Put your head right back in the water (trying to get the hair wet).
Come on, drown.
S: Not drown!! Drown is go down to the bottom and be dead
(3;7;8) (M and S enter house dripping wet with rain)
M: (to F) Oh, we’re drowned!
S: What does drown mean?
M: Means we’re all wet
(3;7;10)
S:
Maybe it’s going to sprinkler. You know what sprinkler means? It means
little raindrops. And sometimes sprinkler is click on (?unclear); that
means squirt at people
(3;8;27)
S: Ooh, listen! Look it’s- it’s hail. See the ice; you know, hail is balls of ice
(3;10) (S bringing M a complex lego structure, carrying it gingerly)
S: Balance means you hold it on your fingers and it doesn’t go on the floor
44
guiding the child to reflect on meaning
as process
45
as processes of construal (inner semiosis) – seeing, knowing, thinking,
remembering
(2;7;1) (Bedtime book reading)
M: Going to have this one first?
D’you know what the name of this tiger is?
He’s called (pause) Growl!
S: Mm, Growl
M [reads text]…
‘Your shadow” chuckled Trumpet
Do you know what a shadow is?
S: Mm
M: You see my shadow, here on the book
See that? See my hand? See the shadow of my hand. Shadow, fingers
moving; see the fingers moving
[reads on in text]
M: The pond is like a mirror, you see
And do you know what Growl was frightened of?
He was frightened of his own face in the mirror, in the pond, his own
reflection
46
(3;8;1)
(M asks S if he knows a word in their book)
S: No
M: It’s an animal
S: Rabbit?
M: No, it’s ‘dog’
S: Dog’s not an animal!
M: Yes it is… [further talk omitted] What is it, then?
S: It’s- it’s just a dog
M: Yes, but dogs are animals
S: No, they aren’t; dogs aren’t animals
M: Well, what’s an animal then?
S: Um, giraffes are animals
M: Oh, I see, you think animal is only for zoo animals
S: Yeah
M: Dogs are animals, too; they’re tame animals. And cats, cats are animals too.
Did you know that?
Bro: (chipping in) And people, were animals
S: We’re not.
47
3;5;24
S: That’s for later [i.e. fruit] for porridge, if Daddy buys some more porridge
M: If Daddy makes some porridge
S: No, no, buy some porridge
M: You buy the oats, you don’t buy the porridge
S: Do you make porridge?
M: Yes, you know that, you’ve seen Daddy make porridge
S: Oh (pause) you put the muesli in, and all of it in and then let it go
and then it turns into porridge
4;4;10
S: Hey, Mum, can dolphins eat boats?
M: No
S: Why?
M: They don’t want to eat boats; they eat fish.
Are you thinking of Pinocchio (recently seen movie)?
S: Yes
M: Oh, that was a whale. But they don’t really swallow boats.
48
as processes of verbalising (external semiosis) – say, tell
(1;8;11) (pushing an open picture book at M)
H: Doing; doing (demanding tone)
M: (puzzled at first) Oh; what’s he doing? Is that what I say?
H: (beams)
M: So, what’s he doing?...
49
verbalising as semiotic identity relation
(2;6;22) (M and S open a picture book)
M: Hal wrote his name in this book. See, that says ‘Hal’
S: Hal; Hal’s book
M: Yes, it was Hal’s book
(2;7;3) (F hanging up S’s coat at kindy)
F: There’s your peg; See (points at label) that says Stephen
S: ‘S’ (pointing) ‘S’
(2;7;1) (S pointing at words in picture book)
S:
M:
M:
S:
M:
S:
That’s same as Hal and that’s same as Daddy… and that’s Mummy
I tell you what – this one is ‘sun’ there; see and this one says ‘snow’…
That says eskimo
Oh, eskimo
And you know what that says? That one says whale
Mm, whale
(2;7;13)
M: Here’s our Peter Rabbit book
S: (points to random word) That says Peter Rabbit
50
symbols as meaning sources & Sayers in verbal processes
3;7;18 (M driving, in slow heavy traffic)
M: Oh I’m going to get stuck behind this car now
S: Why?
M: He’s going to turn right
S: Oh. Oh why’s he turning right?
M: Well he’s blinking his light
S: He (peering) he is blinking his light
M: Yes, that – do you know what that means?
that means that in a minute that car’s going to go that way (points)
S: Are we going that way or that way? Are we going left or right?
M: Straight on
S: What does straight on mean?
M: Means we’re not going to turn at all, see?
…
M: I can’t see his [indicator] light
S: There! That light (pointing at brake light ahead)
M: No, the red light- the red light tells you the car’s not moving;
it’s the little yellow lights that tell you whether they’re gonna turn round or not…
51
later: adult models the written text as a meaning-making source
4;7;21 (reading a book about birds together)
M: Look, he’s a starling and it says he has built his nest inside the eagle’s nest.
Isn’t that strange? I didn’t know they did that…
S:
M:
…..
M:
S:
M:
……
S:
M:
S:
What’s that? …..
Well, I’m just trying to read and see
He flies about most of the year; this one’s flying over the sea.
Even when it’s raining?
I suppose so, yes, but it doesn’t tell you about that
What-what is it trying to do?
Oh it’s just – it’s had a bit of an accident I think, I suppose; well let me see
if it tells youDoes it tell what he’s doing?
52
adult contribution as a resource
1a. for use ‘verbatim’ within the instance
2;8;29
S: Look Mummy baa baa black sheep
M: Oh, that’s not a sheep,
that’s a dog with a woolly coat.
It’s called a poodle. Poodle.
S: Oh, poodle
(later)
S: That’s not a lamb, no
4;7;21
M: it doesn’t tell you about that
……
M: Well let me see if it tells youS: Does it tell what he’s doing?
53
“A piece of text is construed, and used appropriately,
which includes lexicogrammatical and phonological
features that have not yet been processed into the
system. The system then catches up and goes ahead”
(Halliday, [1980] 2003: 203)
(4;8;30)
F:
S:
This car can’t go as fast as ours.
I thought- I thought all cars could- all cars could go the sameall cars could go the same (pause) fast.
M: The same speed.
S: Yes, same speed.
54
• The effect of this ongoing dialectic [of system and
process] is a kind of leapfrogging movement:
sometimes an instance will appear to be
extending the system, sometimes to be lagging
behind
• A language is a system-text continuum, a
meaning potential in which ready-coded
instances of meaning are complemented by
principles for coding what has not been meant
before. (Halliday [1993] 2004: 341)
55
adult contribution as a resource
1b. for negotiation within the instance (learner recasts adult)
(3;6;5)
S: Mum, could you cry; could you cry or not?
M: Yes, I could cry.
S: How?
M: What do you mean? If I hurt myself I might cry, same as you.
S: If you fell down bump really really hard.
(3;6;30 F and S in car talking about sports cars)
F: And they go fast ‘cause they’ve got a big engine
S: But that doesn’t go faster than us. (pointing) See?
F: He’s not trying; if he was really trying he could go much faster than us
S: If he goes very fast he can- if he goes very fast he can beat us
56
2)
for storage and ‘re-use’ on future comparable occasions
with original interactants (reversing roles)
typical text age 2
M: Don’t you want any tea? Do
you want some biscuits and
cheese?
H: No
M: No? Not hungry. You’re not
hungry tonight, eh?
new feature (justifying a refusal) at 2;3
M: What a bit of toast?
H: No thanks, I not hungry
( H pulling M & F by hands)
H: Want to run again
F: No, we can’t run any more;
Daddy’s too tired
and Mummy’s too tired
M: Why don’t you get the little cars out?
H: Mummy play cars; I can’t play cars;
I’m too tired
Adult models by ‘speaking for’
the child
Child adopts discourse structure
(justifying refusal) and specific excuse
57
2)
for storage and ‘re-use’ on future comparable occasions
with new interactants
(3;5;20)
(M warns S that he will crack his head if he’s not careful on the tiled floor)
S: No, cause it’s got bone in see? (taps head)
M: But bones can break.
S: No, it’s hard.
M: Yes, but if you bang your head on the hard floor, it can still break,
the bones can smash.
3 days later
(3;5;23)
(M calls out to local children in street to be careful climbing the tree)
M: The branches are not very strong
S: And- and you can fall and your bones can SMASH
58
adult contribution as a resource
3. making visible new systemic options that ‘perturb’ the child’s system
2;7;9 (talking about recent outing)
S: That baby cry- crying
M: Yes, it was; well babies do cry a lot when they’re little
2;7;3
S: That dog got a shaky tail
M: Yes, dogs wag their tails when they’re happy
2;8;12 (M and S looking at a picture book about circus)
S: Is that the clown?
M: Yes; that’s the clown ‘cause he’s got a big red nose; clowns often have
red noses
(3;7;5) (S talking to M about the ‘big shoes’ at the door)
S: Hal has [big shoes] and you have and Daddy has; grown-ups have
59
Whichever path for the particular linguistic features, it has been made
available to child through the co-created instance/s
60
Recurring interactional patterns
61
Focussing attention with meta-semiotic moves
M: And do you know what Growl was frightened of?
He was frightened of his own face in the mirror, in the pond, his own
M: reflection
And do you remember what that is?
S:
Mm
Probing for extensions from the child (co-constructing monologue)
Nigel:
M:
Goat try eat lid…man said no.
Why did the man say no?
Elaborating child’s contribution or adult response with additional K1 moves
S: Made of ice.
M: And it’s called igoo
M: Don’t you want any tea? Do you want some biscuits and cheese?
H: No
M: No? Not hungry. You’re not hungry tonight, eh
S: That dog got a shaky tail
M: Yes, dogs wag their tails when they’re happy
62
Recasting the child’s contribution
S:
M:
S:
M:
S:
M:
S:
Why (?unclear) clouds and it does rain?
Why does it rain?
Why- why- there are clouds and it does start to rain and we don’t like it?
Why does it rain when we don’t want it to?
Mm
I don’t know
You have to tell something to me! (3;6;2)
F:
S:
This [hired] car can’t go as fast as ours.
I thought- I thought all cars could- all cars could go the sameall cars could go the same (pause) fast.
M: The same speed.
S: Yes, same speed. (4;8;30)
63
Clarifying the child’s contribution
3;5;7 (street near preschool)
S: When they go to work, they leave their cars here.
M: Who do?
S: The peoples.
M: The people at kindy?
S: No, the people who goes to work. (?people’s) mummies.
Challenging the child’s construals
S: Look Mummy baa baa black sheep
M: Oh, that’s not a sheep, that’s a dog with a woolly coat.
It’s called a poodle. Poodle.
S: Oh, poodle
(later)
S: That’s not a lamb, no ( 2;8;29)
… via argument
(M warns S that he will crack his head if he’s not careful on the tiled floor)
S: No, cause it’s got bone in see? (taps head)
M: But bones can break.
S: No, it’s hard.
M: Yes, but if you bang your head on the hard floor, it can still break,
the bones can smash. (3;5;20)
64
oral language development at home
• children learn their first language in interaction
with guidance from a more expert user
• shared experience (material and textual) is the
basis of that guidance
• adults guide through
– sharing the semantic load in co-constructions
– talking about semiosis
– focusing attention, eliciting extensions, elaborating
and recasting child’s contributions, clarifying and
challenging the child’s construals, offering text for
uptake (as text and/or systemic choice)
65
Interaction in formal literacy
education?
66
1980s+ Re-evaluation of ‘transmission’ classroom methodologies in favour
of progressivist, child centred ‘constructivist’ ideas
‘Traditional’ emphasis
‘Progressive’ emphasis
didactic telling: ‘chalk and talk’ ‘child centred’
product
process
teaching subjects
teaching students
teacher as manager
teacher as facilitator
skills
strategies
This kind of dichotomising comparison alive and well in the 00s
cf. Alexander, R Culture and Pedagogy: International Comparisons in
Primary Education Oxford, Blackwell, 2000: 548
67
By 1990s
explicitly Vygotskyan approaches as ‘social constructivism’
But in inviting contributions to Social Constructivist Teaching Brophy reports:
“Some authors even expressed discomfort with the term ‘social constructivist
teaching.’ They were more comfortable talking about learning and ways to
support students’ construction of knowledge…”
(Brophy, J. (ed) Social Constructivist Teaching: Affordances and Constraints 2002: xx-xxi)
68
Foregrounding
interaction but
eliding guidance…
A Social Constructivist Model of Learning and
Teaching as summarised in Wells, G (1999) Dialogic
Enquiry
1.Creating a classroom community which shares a commitment to caring, collaboration,
and a dialogic mode of making meaning.
2.Organizing the curriculum in terms… that encourage a willingness to wonder…and to
collaborate with others in building knowledge
3.Negotiating goals that:
1. challenge students…
2. are sufficiently open-ended…
3. involve the whole person
4. provide opportunities to master the culture’s tools thru purposeful use
5. encourage group work and individual effort
6. give equal value to …processes and …products
4.Ensuring there are occasions for students to
1. use a variety of modes of representation…
2. present work to others and receive… feedback
3. reflect on what they have learned…
4. receive guidance and assistance in their ZPDs
69
Wells emphasises responding not guiding
“a key feature of the [ideal] teacher role was that it was
generally responsive rather than initiatory.” Wells 1999, p.300
An example of working in student’s ZPD (science class)
(after children have been working with peers in small groups for an hour)
T: Now.. did you make sure that [tape measure] was lined up at the
starting?
C: Um- (shakes her head)
T: No, OK. Why don’t you start again then, cos that’s what you need to
do… so erase what you did before, now you know how to do it.
(Wells, G. Dialogic Enquiry: Towards a Sociocultural Practice and Theory of
Education. 1999 p 303)
70
“It is better for a teacher to provide elaborations through
instruction than to provide feedback on poorly understood
concepts”
Hattie, J A C (2009) Visible Learning: A synthesis of over 800 metaanalyses relating to achievement Routledge: London and NY 2009: 177
71
no asymmetrical dyad here!!
“It is not so much a more capable other that is required
as a willingness on the part of all participants to learn
with and from each other”
(Wells, G Dialogic Inquiry 1999 p.324)
72
Sydney School Genre Approach TLC
based on SFL early case studies of language development
implicit and explicit
modelling of genre
relevant content
established and
shared as part of
writing process
cultural
purpose for
writing
always in
foreground
co-constructed
model scribed and
discussed in public
Write it Right teaching/learning cycle
(Rothery, 1994)
73
deconstruction phase
More monologic: with attention focusing, scaffolded with metalanguage
T: Ok. so she’s very clearly given her three Arguments. Can everyone see that? And
the very interesting thing is that she lets you know in the introduction what those
three Arguments are going to be. She hasn’t told you what they’re going to be; she’s
just mentioned them…
Can you see the difference? Because people started in that introduction going on to
the Argument. You don’t [go into] it there; you only mention it. You don’t go into the
… giving the reasons for the Argument. Can you see the difference?
More dialogic: students take up on basis of that public sharing via IRF
T:
F:
T:
R:
T:
N:
T:
L:
T
OK. So there’s a few things to think about. What are some of the things I
mentioned you are going to try to think abut when we do this one today? Filippa?
Not to um, put an Argument into the Thesis
Good. Right. Something else
Don’t repeat yourself
Don’t repeat Excellent. Something else. Who can think of something? Yes
Don’t put any other ideas in the paragraph you are talking about.
Good girl. Keep all the paragraph unified. Don’t start introducing new ideas into
74
the same one. Something else, to think about. Yes.
The Argument that you’re doing has to be like he topic or Thesis that you choose
Right. So you make sure you mentioned all your Arguments in your Thesis. Good.
Organising ideas under teacher guidance for use in Joint Construction
T:
Right OK. Now lets try and get these into an order so we can organise how many
paragraphs or how many new ideas we are going to introduce. Can someone sort
of help me work that out? Who can see the main thing that keeps coming… the
whole way through? Lisa?
Lisa: Learn about a wide range of subjects
T: Right. This seems to be one of the most important things, doesn’t it? So we can
put say a ‘1’ next to it. Where else does it come up again?
Lisa: Put that [pointing at notes] with the ‘1’
T: Right. So we can put ‘1’ against that- that could all be part of the same…
paragraph then, couldn’t it? Somewhere else- the same sot of thing where we
can link it together? Can you find any other links? Filippa?
Fili: Use your education to get a good job
T: Right. Now, would that be a new idea? Or is it the same do you think? …
Remember that glue- trying to get that paragraph to stick together: We want to
have a complete paragraph and then another complete paragraph. Do you think
that one would work as a follow-up? After you’ve got your knowledge and you’ve
applied all these skills, what are you going to be able to do there?
S: Support your family
T: Support your family by what?
S: A job.
T: A job. So that would really be another paragraph wouldn’t it?......
75
jointly constructing
Exposition text on the value of school education
2nd Argument in relation to whiteboard notes
where points have been grouped by numbers
76
T:
O.K. So, next paragraph. Let’s have a look. Who can start? Look at the
number 2s now. What’s another good argument? Um, Safi? Um, um, Rana?
S: It gives you an education to help you get a job and to work.
T: Alright. Now, we really need to link that a little bit with the first paragraph. So
what could we say? Secondly, by achieving this, what did we just achieve? Yes.
T/Ss This knowledge.
T: We will be then what?
T/Ss Be in a better position to... to get a job. And to pursue our... careers.
S: And support a family
T: Secondly, after achieving this knowledge, it will then put all individuals who
attend the school, in a position [some students reading along]
O.K. So can you read that for me, Nicole?
S: [reads text so far]
T: Good. And what else? Can we develop that a little bit more? is there anything
there that you can add to that from the board? Daad?
S: And you can support your family or yourself from your job.
T: Right. Um, so this will enable the individual to then support themselves or
their...
[unison] families.
77
explanation of recasting
T:
You noticed here I’ve used the word individual rather than say
myself. I could say myself if I was writing it for myself, but
considering I’m not, I’m writing for everyone, that’s why I’m
using the word individual. If you were writing it, if you were
trying to convince your audience, you could take two ways. If you
used the word individual, it means everyone that ever goes to
school, which is a stronger statement that if it’s just your own
statement referring to... you. So, you have to think about that
when you’re writing, think about who’s reading it and which is
going to make the stronger statement.
78
Tertiary students: applied linguistics learning a
text interpretation genre
E.g. 1
T: Who can give me a topic sentence for this paragraph?
S: ‘Speaking about participants, we can see that school kid and
teacher are used the most often’
T: OK
But let’s get rid of the ‘we can see’ because we’ve given part of the
front of the clause there to ‘we can see.’ You can forget the ‘we can
see’ and just go straight to what you want to say
E.g. 2
T:
S:
T:
So who can try to make a sentence for me that connects urbanisation with
health issues, and which introduces us to positive and negative consequences,
or something like that?
Ah ‘a host of, ah, health needs can provide to the people in the cities.’
OK. But I’ll write ‘A host of health needs can be provided to people in cities.’
79
E.g. 3
T:
S:
T:
S:
T:
S:
T:
So can anyone suggest a sentence here?
no response
How about we start with the word ‘transitivity’
no response
How about we start with the words ‘transitivity selections’ or ‘choices’
Transitivity selections tell us about the activity sequences and
taxonomies that make up the field of education
Beautiful!
Cited in Martin & Dreyfus ‘Scaffolding semogenesis: designing teacher/student
interactions for face-to-face and on-line learning’ in Starc (ed) (forthcoming)
80
How is this like earlier experience?
81
Co-construction of the exemplary instance is at the heart of
the ‘natural’ language learning process
Such instances
– involve shared attention to and investment in the meanings negotiated
– capitalise on shared experiences (textual and material)
– involve an interactant with a more advanced meaning potential
– capitalise on the learner’s capacity to reflect on and talk about meaning
– involve elaborations and recastings of meanings made
– enable the learner to appropriate and re-use ‘more advanced’ text
– make ‘visible’ through text more advanced systemic options and realisations
a written joint construction in a classroom, additionally
- requires the teacher to be overtly conscious of the meaning potential
to be made ‘visible’ in the co-instantiated text (planning!)
- draws on publicly available scaffolds in the form of notes, lists,
concept maps, generic staging labels …
82
going forward…
Is the joint construction the part of the TLC least likely to be
emulated? If so, why?
Can co-constructions be more ‘designed’ so that they are
maximally effective?
(cf Rose’s Reading to Learn where exchanges constitute planned
phases of: Identify^Prepare^Extend^Focus^Highlight)
If talking about language is integral to language development,
how effective can joint constructions be without investment in
metalanguage beyond generic staging?
83
Articulating our theory of learning as a
complementary theory of teaching
- guidance through interaction
- shared experience
- explicit reflection on language
84
References
Alexander, R Culture and Pedagogy: International Comparisons in Primary Education
Oxford, Blackwell, 2000: 548
Applebee, A N and Langer, J A ‘Instructional Scaffolding: Reading and Writing as
Natural Language Activities’ Language Arts 60.5: 168-175
Brophy, J. (ed) (2002) Social Constructivist Teaching: Affordances and Constraints
(Advances in Research on Teaching v. 9) Amsterdam, New York, JAI/ Elsevier
Science
Bruner, J S (1978) ‘The role of dialogue in language acquisition.’ In Sinclair, A, Jarvella,
R and Levelt, W J M (eds) The Child’s Conception of Language. NY, Springer Verlag
Chomsky, N (1986) Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin and Use. NY, Praeger
Christie, F. and Derewianka, B (2008) Learning to Write across the Years of Schooling
London & New York
Derewianka, B (2003) ‘Grammatical metaphor in the transition to adolescence.’ In
Simon-Vandenbergen, A M, Taverniers, M and Ravelli, L (eds) Grammatical
Metaphor: Views from Systemic Functional Linguistics Amsterdam / Philadelphia
PA, Benjamins: 142-165
Foder, J A, Bever, T G & Garret M F (1974) The psychology of language: An Introduction
to Psycholinguistics and Generative Grammar. NY McGraw-Hill
Halliday, M A K (1975) Learning How to Mean London, Arnold
Halliday, M A K (1980) ‘The contribution of developmental linguistics to the
interpretation of language as system.’ In Halliday, 2003: 197-209
85
Halliday, M A K (1992/ 2002) ‘How do you mean?’ In his On Grammar: Collected
Works v.1 Ed. J Webster: 352-368
Halliday, M A K (1993/2004) ‘Towards a language based theory of learning.’
Linguistics and Education 5.2: 93-116 In His The Language of Early Childhood.
Collected Works v.4 Ed. J Webster
Halliday, M A K (2004) The Language of Early Childhood. Collected Works, v. 4. Ed. J
Webster. London, Continuum.
Hattie, JAC (2009) Visible Learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to
achievement. Routledge: London and NY
Lemke, J (1995) Textual Politics: Discourse and Social Dynamics. London, Taylor &
Francis
McNeil, D. (1966) ‘Developmental Psycholinguistics.’ The Genesis of Language: A
Psycholinguistic Approach. Proceedings of a Conference on ‘Language Development in Children’. Ed. F. Smith and G. A. Miller. Cambridge MA, MIT Press
Martin, J R and Dreyfus, S (forthcoming) ‘Scaffolding semogenesis: designing
teacher/student interactions for face-to-face and on-line learning’
Ninio, A & Bruner, J 1978 ‘The achievement and antecedents of labeling.’ In
Journal of Child Language 5: 36-49
Nuthall, G (2002) ‘Social Constructivist Teaching and the Shaping of Student’s
Knowledge’ In Brophy (ed) 43-79
Painter, C (1984) Into the Mother Tongue London, Pinter
Painter, C (1999) Learning Through Language in Early Childhood. London,
Continuum
86
Piaget, J (1970) ‘Piaget’s theory.’ In Mussen, P H (ed) Carmichael’s Manual of Child
Psychology. N Y, Wiley
Rogoff, B. (1990) Apprenticeship in thinking. NY, Oxford UP
Rothery, J 1994 Exploring Literacy in School English (Write it Right Resources for
Literacy and Learning). Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools
Program.
Torr, J. (1998) From Child Tongue to Mother Tongue: Language Development in the
First Two and a half Years. (Monographs in Systemic Linguistics) Nottingham,
Nottingham University
Trevarthen, C (1998) ‘The concept and foundations of infant intersubjectivity.’ In
S
Braten (ed) Intersubjective Communication and Emotion in Early Ontogeny.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Trevarthen, C (2009) ‘The Intersubjective Psychobiology of Human Meaning:
Learning of Culture Depends on Interest for Co-operative Practical Work –
and Affection for the Joyful Art of Good Company’. In Psychoanalytic
Dialogues 19: 507-18
Vygotsky, L. 1987 Problems of General Psychology. His Collected Works v.1 tr. R.W.
Rieber. NY, Plenum: 216-7
Wells, G (1999) Dialogic Enquiry: Towards a Sociocultural Practice and Theory of
Education. 1999
Wood, D, Bruner, JS and Ross G (1976) ‘The role of tutoring in problem solving.’
Journal of Child Psychology and Child Psychiatry 17: 89-100
87