This paper, like any other conversation analysis, is “an approach to the analysis of spoken discourse that looks at the way in which people manage their everyday conversational interactions” (Paltridge 2006:107). The kind of spoken discourse to be analysed here is classroom discourse. There are many different “aspects of spoken discourse” (2006:107) that help to analyse a conversation such as sequences, turn taking, code-switching, feedback, repair, openings and closings, to name just a few. This paper will take a closer look at some of these aspects and in particular at opening sequences and repair. But I will first of all give a short introduction on the structure of lessons as a basis for the following chapters.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Talk at school – An analysis of classroom discourse
2.1. Lesson structure
2.2. Opening sequences
2.3. Repair
3. Conclusion
4. References
5. Appendix
5.1. Transcription Bili 7b2 01.07.05
5.2. Transcription Bili 7a 17.06.05
Objectives & Research Themes
This paper aims to analyze classroom discourse by examining specific conversational strategies used in the interaction between teachers and students. The central research question explores how communicative structures, particularly opening sequences and repair strategies, facilitate or influence the educational process in classroom environments.
- Theoretical foundation of lesson structures (IRF-model)
- Mechanisms and functions of opening sequences
- Strategies of self-repair and other-repair in students
- Teacher intervention and corrective feedback techniques
- Analysis of real-world classroom transcriptions
Excerpt from the Book
2.3. Repair
Another interesting feature in conversation is the strategy of repair or correction. My decision to analyse this topic derived from the many incidences of repair I found during the data research. In fact, I found instances of repair in every single transcription I was looking at. Still, all examples following are based on data of the tenth grade English lesson from the Kassel classroom discourse of the SCoSE.
First of all, what is repair? By repair, Schegloff (2000:207) “refer[s] to practices for dealing with problems or troubles in speaking, hearing, and understanding the talk in conversation”. Therefore, repair is a strategy speakers use to “correct things they or someone else has said” (Paltridge 2006:119). There are two different types of repair: “self repair and other repair” (2006:119).
Self repair, as the name implies, is a correction of an utterance made by the same person. In the following example, the student is reading a text on elections in Great Britain out loud: 187 Frauke the Prime MiNIster is the leader of se largest party in the Commons. 191 each of six hundred thirty-five..constituencies elects an M pie P on the same day. 192 an extra-election or by-election, 193 made be necessary in a (pacually) constituency 194 if an MP has died.
The “trouble-source (TS)” (Schegloff 2000:205) as well as the self-repair is at line 191: the abbreviation MP is first mispronounced as [‘empa] instead of [‘empi:], but the student immediately realises her mistake and corrects [pa] by saying [pi:].
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter introduces the research focus on classroom discourse and explains the methodology of using transcriptions from actual school lessons as the basis for analysis.
2. Talk at school – An analysis of classroom discourse: This section provides the theoretical framework of lesson structures, focusing on the IRF-model, and delves into the analysis of opening sequences and repair strategies within the classroom.
3. Conclusion: The conclusion synthesizes the findings, confirming the prevalence of the IRF-structure and highlighting the importance of repair strategies in managing teacher-student communication.
4. References: This section lists all academic sources used to support the linguistic analysis of the paper.
5. Appendix: The appendix contains the raw transcription data collected from various bilingual geography and English lessons.
Keywords
Classroom discourse, conversation analysis, IRF-structure, teacher-student interaction, repair, self-repair, other-repair, lesson structure, linguistics, applied linguistics, teaching methodology, discourse strategies, feedback, SCoSE, communication.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this academic paper?
The paper focuses on the analysis of spoken classroom discourse, specifically examining how teachers and students interact through defined conversational strategies.
What are the main thematic fields covered in the work?
The main themes include the structural organization of classroom lessons, the significance of greetings as opening sequences, and the methods by which teachers and students handle corrections (repair).
What is the central research objective?
The objective is to identify and analyze the recurrent conversational strategies that structure the classroom environment and facilitate the teacher-student interaction.
Which scientific methodology is utilized?
The paper employs conversation analysis, applying models like the IRF-structure (Initiation, Response, Feedback) to transcribe and examine real-world data from classroom recordings.
What is addressed in the main body of the text?
The main body investigates the basic structure of lessons, the role of opening sequences (greetings), and a detailed analysis of "self-repair" versus "other-repair" techniques during student readings.
Which keywords best characterize the research?
Key terms include Classroom discourse, IRF-structure, Repair, Teacher-student interaction, and Conversation analysis.
Why is the teacher generally in control of the classroom discourse?
The teacher is responsible for organizing the lesson, maintaining social relationships, and managing the talk, which gives them exclusive access to selecting the next speaker in the interaction.
What is "third turn repair" as discussed in the text?
Third turn repair is a delayed form of correction where the teacher does not immediately interrupt the student, but initiates the correction after the student has finished their turn.
Why does the author consider "self-repair" to be a superior method?
Self-repair is seen as more effective because it requires the student to become aware of their own mistake, increasing the likelihood that they will not repeat the error in the future.
- Citation du texte
- Eva K. Sammel (Auteur), 2009, Talk at school - An analysis of classroom discourse, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/132238
