My research design was loosely framed within the theories of Vygotsky. The social constructivist work of Vygotsky was centered on understanding of how social interactions lead to conceptual understanding. My study, influenced by Vygotsky’s work, was focused on how students used those social interactions to construct conversations that are meaning-making. My research does not look deeply into how students internalize their social interactions, but rather, in specifically investigate the production of the generative discourse that plays a role in conceptual understanding. My research uses dialogic models of language suggested by Keys et al. (2000). Their research suggests that dialogic models of language are appropriate for conducting research …show more content…
Table 2.2 describes these variations. I created activities that were concrete and straightforward. The investigations were a tool for me to connect students to abstract concepts such as force and motion. McDonald et al. (2002, p. 5) believes that “learners need access to the world in order to connect the knowledge in their head with the knowledge in the world”. To give this access, teachers need practices such as hand-on investigations. Each investigation was aligned with Newton’s Laws of Motion. The concepts in the investigations were observable, and students not only designed the investigations, but they were able to observe the scientific phenomenon through carrying out multiple trials. I chose activities that were not overly challenging or too easy and were suited to the skill and knowledge level of the 7th and 8th grade students. By using the recommendations of Colburn (2000) with structured-inquiry learning segments, students in my study had more control of their …show more content…
Students then created a step-by-step procedure for their investigation as a group. During the first investigation, I chose a group to share their procedure and attempted to follow their directions. This was done because about half of the class, primarily 7th graders, had never written a procedure and it was important for them to know how to correctly write a procedure so that they could follow it during their investigation. During Guided Inquiry, only the materials and problem are supplied by the teacher for the students to investigate (Colburn, 2000). The students are then left to devise their procedure to come up with a solution. Because I supplied the example of the procedure, the activities are considered Structured
Conversation Analysis (CA) is the study of talk-within-interaction that attempts to describe the orderliness, structure and sequential patterns of interaction in conversation. It is a method of qualitative analysis developed by Harvey Sacks with the aid of Emmanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson in the late 1960s to early 1970s. Using the CA frame of mind to view stories shows us that what we may think to be simplistic relaying of information or entertaining our friends is in fact a highly organised social phenomena that is finely tuned in a way that expresses the teller’s motivation behind the talk. (Hutchby & Wooffitt, 2011). It is suggested that CA relies on three main assumptions; talk is a form of social action, action is structurally organised, talk creates and maintains inter-subjectivity (Atkinson & Heritage, 1984).
The thesis, or the main idea of the book, is that by using specific communication techniques, we can turn difficult discussions into productive learning conversations.
Pages 261- 267. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.10.006. Cameron, D. (2001). The 'Case Working with spoken discourse and communication. London: Thousand Oaks & Co. Carson, C., & Cupach, W. (2000).
Vygotsky placed much more emphasis on language that Piaget (book). Vygotsky’s theory focuses on the role of interpersonal processes and the role of the child’s community and culture which provide a framework from which the child’s construction of meaning develops (book). Although Vygotsky stressed that the process must be in in the context of the child’s culture and the tools available within that culture. Vygotsky was always especially interested in cognitive processes which underline understanding which has led to the concept of shared understandings that occur when people communicate with each other. Vygotsky argued that through the use of language formed through social interaction a child can develop as a thinker and a learner (book). As a conscious individual people could not accomplish very much without the aids and tools within their culture such as language (book). Piaget argued that language was strongly influenced by the underlying cognitive structures within the individual child (book). They also disagreed on the egocentric speech of children. When observing children Piaget concluded that half of the mistakes children made was down to egocentric speech which he argued showed that children have not tried to communicate with another or adapted so others can understand them he also argued that young children did not seem to care if anyone else could understand them and
This reading reminded me about how Vygotsky’s theory is mostly based on the interactions and influences help children to learn. I really do believe this theory is very accurate, because students can learn from each other. If a teacher is having trouble explaining a complex topic to a student, another student can explain it in more relatable way. Also, I was fascinated when I read about what cultural tools, were and how they related to Vygotsky’s beliefs. Learning about what cultural tools were, helped me to broaden my understanding of how crucial cultural tools are to student’s learning process. Also, the chapter did a great job of elaborating on how these tools can help to advance and grow in the understanding of student’s thinking process. Another aspect of this reading that interested me was the elaboration on private speech and the Zone of Proximal Development. Each of the definitions displayed help me to advance my own thinking on what it was and how it is used in regards to the education of students. The description of what private speech and how it is basically the inner narration of their thinking process helped me to understand how this aspect can help with students learning. Also, the Zone of Proximal Development helped me to make a connection to both what is and how it relates to private speech as well. The Zone of proximal development plays a crucial role in the
In linguistic studies throughout the 1900’s, most linguists and scholars focused their research on members of society that were middle-class, heterosexual, white males, and it wasn’t until the mid-70’s when Robin Lakoff released Language and Woman’s Place that linguistic research regarding the connections between language and gender was conducted. Lakoff’s work resonated with feminists of the time and therefore illustrated the ways that language can be used to create and reinforce sexist behaviors in society. However, much has changed since 1973 when Lakoff’s work was first released. Postmodern feminist theories involving gender roles, gender identity, sexuality, and expansion of opportunities for women and minority genders1 are all continually
...reorganize, refine, modify, or adapt constructs (or conceptual systems) that they DO have” versus defining or creating new ideas (Lesh & Lehrer, 2003). Vygotsky (1978) mentions that language has an influence on the thinking of a student, but models and modeling perspectives extends beyond just language in that there are other influences from the culture of a student beyond language that have an influence on their thinking (Cobb & McClain, 2001). Along a variety of dimensions is how models and modeling perspectives develop the conceptual tools versus Vygotsky focus on internalizing the experience (Lesh, 2002). Thus, Lesh extends Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development to a multi-dimensional region in which there are various ways to develop an understanding of a concept as well as different paths to travel while exploring the different regions (Lesh & Lehrer, 2003).
The period of childhood is the most significant in the establishment of human beings as mature, independent and socially active people. Thus, no wonder that children 's psychological development was thoroughly studied by such psychologists as Piaget, Freud, Vygotsky and many more. All of them have seen their own principles of development and pointed the key topics and elements that influenced the most. Why is it so important to explore the childhood development? Multiple researches and evidences show that the brain is especially sponge like during the first few years of growing up. This is the time, when kids
Connor’s language development was very similar to his peers being they spoke in clear, short sentences, usually as statements, like “I want more cheese” or “yes, please”. Vygotsky says that around the age of three or four, children use the language they established to categorize their thoughts in social situations (Steinberg et al., 2011, p. 209). According to Vygotsky, Connor language skills are normative for his age and gender, when he said “read me a story” he had to organize his thoughts and decipher what he wanted then articulate them to the adult. As far as nonverbal communication, he made eye contact with the teacher when he asked her to read him a story and he sat upright in his chair showing that he was interested and attentive.
According to Development of Children and Adolescents, children learn five new words a day. Therefore, people wonder how children construct their knowledge and language, along with what is going through their complex and developing brains. Different theories have been developed and researched to try and demolish some of the confusion encircling the minds of parents, educators, psychologists and others. With this being said, over the past decade there has been a major upsurge of interest in the ideas of Lev Spencer Vygotsky (1896-1934), which has reflected in the dramatic rise in citations of Vygotsky’s publications (Wertsch & Tulviste, 1992). There are many features involved with Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory that focuses on language and
The lesson focus: Using unit of measurements was carefully planned considering students differing levels of interest, motivation and learn in various ways. Pedagogical approaches embedded were: Problem solving/inquiry teaching, reflective practice and planning for relationships/peer learning. (Findlay, 2014). The learning throughout the lesson was structured progressively, to ensure all students move through the learning and investigation at their level. This approach resonates with ‘Piaget’s theory’, of Stages of Cognitive Development, which resonates with the belief that students should move progressively through stages without skipping any stages. The ‘explicit teaching’ approach combined with the inquiry teaching was instrumental in providing clear learning and behaviour expectations for all students. Effective clear instruction assists learners to assimilate and process new information. (Satto, 1997). This was also designed to promote respectful on- task behaviour to maximise all learning opportunities for all students.
Inquiry-based learning is supported when educators are co-learners with children as they develop, supporting and extending on a child’s own attempts at understanding. This knowledge can be broadened by ensuring that children have the time, space and resources to become deeply involved in their investigations and there are opportunities for reflections during and after activities (Touhill, 2012a). Furthermore, it is imperative that the physical environment contains spaces as well as materials that encourage a child’s curiosity and investigation (Touhill, 2012a). By providing interesting and engaging materials educators are able to provide stimulus for children’s investigation and
Language plays an important in our lives, for children this is a critical time for them to learn how they can use language to communicate effectively from the when they learn through school and into adulthood. While a child goes through school they are exposed to Standard English, but there are diversities that appear in the classroom for example culture plays a part in language development. Gee and Hayes (2011) stated that there are many things that language can be including; a set of rules, a cognitive experience, a social tool or an object, but overall language is something that changed based on culture and social context. Acknowledging and accepting diversity in the classroom in relation to language and language learning is important
The way we perceive language is the foundation of our social construction an individual or group relationships, and studies in sociolinguistics have tried to explain this relationship between the use of language and the importance of perceptions. A particular discourse, spoken or written, can stem from different sources
Situative and other sociocultural perspectives on learning construe knowing as fundamentally social Discourse to Enhance Formative Assessment and Practice (Gutierrez & Rogoff, 2003; Lave & Wenger, 1991) and view participation in discourse, for example, as primary characterization of learning and knowing. In this sense, enhancing participation in discursive practices is learning and not simply something that supports learning. In this article, authors draw on Hickey, et. al.' sociocultural views of classroom discourse, which view social interaction as integral to meaning making and learning (e.g., Mercer, 2004; Wickman & Ostman, 2002; Wortham, 2005), but also consider the understanding and skills of individuals. Such scholars characterize the act of completing individual assessments as another form of participation in a trajectory of discursive practices that relate understanding in social situations to that which is “gathered” in more individualized contexts (often inevitable in formal education). Such learning is a trajectory of participation in discursive practices in which students must engage the text and inscriptions of assessments in meaningful ways. This practice necessarily draws upon other, less formal, discursive representations. Hickey,et.al (2005) considered this latter type in their analyses, which then refined across three stages with the goal of scaffolding students’ abilities to navigate more formal discursive representation such as those on achievement tests.