Pedagogical Analysis Paper

Discussion

In this paper, we set out to investigate the pedagogical moves of BGEs from a discourse perspective. The findings of this study suggest that, although their discourse predominated during the guided visits, the diverse communicative approaches adopted and the variety of questions asked revealed the complexity of their pedagogical practices. Firstly, the analysis based on the four classes of communicative approach has revealed that the BGE discourse was interactive and authoritative in nature. Despite the fact that interactive/dialogic discourse was occasionally observed, it was overwhelmed by either an interactive/authoritative or non-interactive/authoritative pattern. Mortimer and Scott (2003) point out that in dialogic discourse

It requires educators to be familiar with students’ school learning experience, sociocultural background, the needs of the individual learner, and so forth (Cox-Petersen et al., 2003; DeWitt & Storksdieck, 2008; Tal & Morag, 2007). In sociocultural learning environments, as Ash and Wells (2006) have suggested, in order to move towards greater individual understanding, students should be encouraged to participate in knowledge building by sharing what they know and by providing arguments through the ongoing challenge of responding to other speakers. However, whether this outcome can be achieved depends on the content being taught and the type of mediation provided by educators (Tal, 2012). Thus, we believe that the BGEs might benefit from making the content less informative and more exploratory when designing learning activities. They need to bear the principles of learning suggested by the sociocultural theory in mind and engage students in joint negotiations through dialoguing. In particular, they might strive to create real discussions, in which the educator and students are in equal or similar positions, by shifting the power relation in favor of the

The detailed picture of the guided visit that we have provided herein emphasizes that the learning environment designed by botanic gardens, or even other informal science institutions in a broader sense, should encourage dialogues, which engage both BGEs and students in creating and making sense of knowledge through joint activities. The findings of this study suggest that the facilitation of dialogues requires the shift of power in discourse from the educator to the learner. Our advice to educators is to pose open-ended questions and employ certain moves (e.g., “elicit”, “maintain”, “press”, etc.) to encourage his or her students to think, interpret, and make new understandings through their contributions to the dialogic discourse. Such discourse can be an essential feature of effective learning in both informal and formal contexts (Ash & Wells, 2006; DeWitt & Hohenstein, 2010; Nystrand, 1997). Another important implication of this study is the use of the framework for identifying the pedagogical functions of the follow-up moves which was devised by drawing on studies conducted in and out of the classroom settings, we believe that educators in different contexts could use it as a tool to guide their teaching practices as well as researchers employing it to analyze learning