Author(s): |
Beck, Terence A. |
Source: |
Theory and Research in Social Education, v41 n1 p1-32 2013 |
|
Pub Date: |
2013-00-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
School Safety; Homosexuality; Discourse Analysis; Marriage; Group Discussion; Social Theories; High Schools; School Culture; Social Attitudes; Social Bias; Discussion (Teaching Technique); High School Students; Gender Issues
Abstract:
Scholars have called for discussions of same-sex marriage in schools as one way of ending the curricular silence around lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) people. Yet, concerns about how students might talk about LGBTQ people can contribute to teachers' reluctance to initiate such discussions. Queer theory suggests that discussions of same-sex marriage require students to negotiate high school cultures that often assume and enforce heterosexuality. Further, students are likely to draw on the larger societal debate, a debate that often characterizes LGBTQ people very differently (and often stereotypically). Informed by discourse analysis, the author examined one discussion of same-sex marriage in a high school classroom and considered the ways students managed both their arguments and their identities. He also examined students' arguments to see how they contest what it means to be LGBTQ. Results of the analysis suggest that the assumption of heterosexuality pervaded the same-sex marriage discussion and that student arguments tended to focus squarely on the nature of LGBTQ people. These findings suggest that romantic notions of classroom safety might be inadequate when discussing same-sex marriage and that teachers need to carefully consider issues of student identity and the discourses available to students before they introduce same-sex marriage as a controversial political issue discussion topic.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
 Show
 Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
 Help |
 Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-04-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Intervention; Teachers; Group Discussion; Discussion (Teaching Technique); Mathematics Instruction; Mathematics Teachers; Responses; Large Group Instruction; Faculty Development; Interaction; Teacher Student Relationship; Coding
Abstract:
This article examines how a coding scheme for mathematics classroom discussion that was created to highlight how teachers negotiate student responses during whole-class discussion around high-level, cognitively demanding tasks was used to help teachers shift what they notice when analyzing classroom discourse. Data from an intervention that trained teachers how to use the coding scheme and then provided them opportunities to use the scheme to code transcripts of classroom discussion are presented. Results suggest that teachers' ability to notice interactions between teacher and students when analyzing classroom discussion (as opposed to focusing on one actor or the other) can be increased and that teachers can learn to identify specific discourse moves teachers use to negotiate student responses. However, teachers' capacity to identify how students' opportunities to learn are related to teacher discourse moves did not change as a result of the intervention. The article goes on to examine how discussion during the intervention itself may have contributed to what teachers learned to notice. This research contributes to the body of work on teachers' noticing by examining the feasibility and efficacy of using transcripts and a coding scheme to foster teachers' ability to notice how they can increase their students' opportunities to learn through mathematics discourse.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-00-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Accuracy; Misconceptions; Questioning Techniques; Discussion (Teaching Technique); Class Organization; Classroom Communication; Synthesis
Abstract:
In this article, the author offers a discussion technique: the twice-around. A variant on the circular response discussion, the twice-around engages students by beginning with students' questions, ensuring equal time for all participants and inviting discussants to build on previous contributions. In the twice-around, participants sit in a circle, and the discussion proceeds in two rounds, with each person speaking once for each round. In the first round, participants pose a question or raise a problem that perplexes them. For the second round, participants discuss the questions. After a moment of silence for thought, the first person begins the discussion by responding to a question (it may be his or her own) or by responding to a theme across questions. After the first person responds, each subsequent person responds to the participant who precedes him or her, beginning with a brief summary of what was said, and then adding a contribution. Participants can add a new example, a different perspective, a connection to a reading, or a synthesis statement. While some groups prefer to test the accuracy of their summaries, doing so is not necessary, since subsequent respondents frequently identify misconceptions or contradictions. Discussants can always return to the initial set of questions, so long as they integrate the questions with the current thread. In a sense, three items are on the table for people to pick up: (1) the questions; (2) previous comments from discussants; and (3) course materials.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-06-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Teaching Methods; Learning Processes; Education; Mathematics Instruction; Problem Solving; Intervention; Geometry; Validity; Mathematical Logic; Discussion (Teaching Technique); Cooperative Learning; Comprehension
Abstract:
Meaningful learning of formal mathematics in regular classrooms remains a problem in mathematics education. Research shows that instructional approaches in which students work collaboratively on tasks that are tailored to problem solving and reflection can improve students' learning in experimental classrooms. However, these sequences involve often carefully constructed reinvention route, which do not fit the needs of teachers and students working from conventional curriculum materials. To help to narrow this gap, we developed an intervention--"shift problem lessons". The aim of this article is to discuss the design of shift problems and to analyze learning processes occurring when students are working on the tasks. Specifically, we discuss three paradigmatic episodes based on data from a teaching experiment in geometrical proof. The episodes show that is possible to create a micro-learning ecology where regular students are seriously involved in mathematical discussions, ground their mathematical understanding and strengthen their relational framework. (Contains 6 figures.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
