1. Concepts in T-fronted Classroom
Discourse
Adapted from
INTERACTIONS DURING TEACHER-FRONTED
CLASS TIME OF ENGLISH CLASSES IN A CHINESE
UNIVERSITY
By
Xiaoyan Xie Xie, 2008

2. Interaction: Monologic or
Dialogic?
Monologic Dialogic
T has pre- T modifies
determined and expands
script. on Ss‟ talk
T and TB are Many voices
dominant in the
voices classroom
Share examples in your transcripts
of all four characteristics if
possible…

3. The Default Instructional Pattern:
T-Initiated Monologic IRF
• Usually a
T: QUESTION
Initiating • T knows
answer
• Usually short
S:
Response
& simple
• Comp. check
• USUALLY
T: Follow- EVALUATIVE
Share your IR up • Closes
(evaluative) F exchange
sequences…

4. F: Evaluative or Communicative?
IRF:
• IRF is Everywhere (West, China, etc)
• “F” is key:
• E For highlighting S errors (L2 & Content)
• C For scaffolding towards independent S
functioning
• But Ts mostly use F to close, not open
the floor to Ss (“Good!”, “Correct!”,
“Perfect!”…)

5. Monologic IRF: Educational
value?
Facilitates T‟s Hard for Ss to start
control more than or challenge
ss‟ learning discourse
Changes Ss‟ T controls
From discovery to Ss learn how to
direction, turn &
ways of knowing transmission NOT think
form of discourse
Harder to China  and the
Used with „slower‟
recall/understand socioeconomic
groups, they get
gap
info (than in slower  gap
widens/perception
discussion) widens
of English ↓

6. Monologic IRF: Conclusion
• lead Ss easily
Enables T • Evaluate Ss‟
to utterances
• Maintain order
• Initiative
• Independent thinking
Reduces
Ss‟ • Development of
conversational skills
• Proficiency growth
• Has its place…but
Monologic • Should NOT be the
IRF norm for language
classrooms
Share your monologic IRFs

7. Dialogic IRF: it‟s all in the „F‟
justifications
anything
connections
goes
„F‟ is
Context-
dependent
counter-
clarification
arguments
elaboration
Share your dialogic F-moves

8. Feedback on Content or
Meaning
Walsh 2003: ECHO
•T‟s echo: unreal conversation
reformulation
•Disturbs flow of ss utterance • Engages ss
•Makes excessive t-talk
Paraphrase
(more
•Obstructs Ss learning elaboration
appropriate • Sustains
model)
opportunities interaction
Non-
F-Move
strategies evaluative • Builds on ss
Use echo/revoicing very
carefully response contributions
Back-
channelling
comment • Signals T‟s
genuine
Repetition interest

9. Dialogic IRF: Why?
Dialogic Monologic
Extends T  S Closes T Ss
Interaction Interaction
Ss construct meaning Meaning already
with T known
Higher-level cognitive Lower-level
L2 use cognitive use of L2
Ss develop proficiency Ss don‟t learn to
by creating with L2 create with L2

10. I&R: Initiate & Respond =
Turn-taking
How T and Ss take, hold,
and give the floor • By name
Call on Ss
Invite S to • e.g. Ss raise handa
reply
Eliciting in
Chinese
classroom
Share the eliciting
s S
• Very popular, but…
examples/strategies you volunteers • Only dominant Ss
volunteer
use in your transcript.
• 2nd -most popular (40 %)
T self- • Makes eliciting irrelevant
answers • Ss learn to depend on T
•No language learning

11. Turn-taking in IRF – The Dangers

12. T-initiated IRF: What‟s the
Solution?
T CONTROLS More
T ALLOWS
LESS: opportunities
MORE:
content and for student
variation to participation
classroom
IRF in learning
interaction

13. Variation to IRF: 3 types
Recitation Responsive Responsive-
Collaborativ
discourse discourse e Discourse
Abandons T-
Monologic More relaxed IRF
initiated IRF
Ss control much of
Ss listen / not
Open-ended Qs classroom
active
discourse
T asks Qs that
T expands F have no known
answers
ResD and RCD: more
opps. for Ss to use L2,
T
longer & more complex accepts/integrates
Ss self-select,
initiate, etc.
all S responses
utterances
Look for ResD and RCD Lots of S-S
interaction
in your transcripts

14. Student-Initiated Interaction
 When Ss initiate
academic and
procedural Qs or They
construct
knowledge
 Volunteer „„F” to T‟s
“R” to their “I”
 Ss‟ cognition, content
knowledge, and S
discourse strategies Engaged
are present
 Most ss must be
Exert power
taught to do this. through
discourse
moves

15. Question Types: Engaging Ss
 Teachers‟ Qs can
 Elicit Ss‟ responses
 Engage & motivate Ss
 Activate Ss‟ schema
 Impact students‟ learning variously
 Sometimes require modification
 Allow ss to co-construct knowledge (converse) with
T

16. Question types
Open Closed
Longer answer Very brief answer
Display
commonly known
answer
Referential
personal answer
Share the T questions in your transcript. Which
type(s) dominate?

17. Question Types: Global Generalized
Classroom Research Findings
How common are
display questions in
daily life?
Displa
y
How much meaning
construction practice
do students get with
display questions?
Referential
How common are
display questions in
your transcripts?

18. Q Modification and wait-time
MIC Techniques: Rapid Wait-time
Q/no 3
 Repeat Wait-time
Short
seconds
Increased
participation
 Rephrase/Chunk
 Visuals (gestures, Incomplete Ss initiate
objects, pictures) More complex
thoughtless language and
 Examples & Cues logic
Quiet Ss more
Share examples of wait-time or no active
wait-time after your questions:
Increased
what kind of responses do you quality and
quantity of s
see? L2 use

19. Questioning strategy
 Must consider Contextual solution
student‟s
 Attitude
 Motivation Hong Kong – Confucian
culture
 T‟s intent
Expand
the F-
move :
“showing Same restricted
off” is not
valued responses: Why?
e.g., ask Lose face Referential Qs = 1- Display Qs = 1- or
follow-up – longer or 2-word reply 2-word reply
questions utterances
risk errors

20. Research:
THE BEST proficiency developing
Qs…
… are tools for
constructing
… are scaffolding
meaning with
others –
In this
context, doing tasks
They help Ss
achieve otherwise
unachievable Within classrooms
utterances.
In courses
Share any scaffolding or
For shared goals
meaning-construction (known reasons)
Qs in your transcripts.
What‟s the percentage?

21. “Non-Question Moves”
Statements: suggesting, guessing
Pausing, listening
Pictures/visuals/realia
Wondering aloud (conversational)
– ss want to help T

22. The Importance of Context
• Evaluate Ss‟ recall
E.g., Intent of
Display Q
• Control ss interpetation
Classroom
context • Low quality response
Korean Ss
perceive „test‟
• Hamper ss‟ thinking
Effectiveness
of T‟s
• T shows sincerity &
questioning personal interest in Ss‟
E.g., Intent of
Display Q responses
Ss‟ interp.
of T‟s T‟s intent
intent
• Higher cognitive
processing
Share evidence of “showing Korean Ss
perceive „T • More complex response
personal interest” in ss cares‟
responses in your transcripts. Is
it easy for ss to perceive your
interest?

23. Feedback on L2 Accuracy
The The
Some Asian uni
good Can prevent L1
bad ss don‟t want any
more EC
rule transfer • Want communicative
practice
Allows learners to
modify or confirm Very few effective
interlanguage techniques
rules
Helps Ss notice
Find examples of the gap between
TL and their
corrective utterance
feedback
(linguistic) in your
transcript.

24. EC: Accuracy - Some results
• T gives correct version
Explicit • Ss can’t reformulate, self-correct, or negotiate form
• Most common – eventually ss may notice/produce correct form
Recasts • Other ss may also benefit from T‟s recast to one S
Elicitation • Ss self- or peer- correct -- negotiate form
Metalinguistic • T: “You need past tense” S: negotiate form
Clarification request • negotiate form
Repetition

25. E.C. Sociocultural Perspective
EC within S‟s Should be
knowledge frame negotiated Ss must self- or
(ZPD) is most (led/scaffolded by peer- correct
effective T, but done by S)
Correct „errors‟, not (self-
„attempts‟. reliance, autonomy)
Share evidence of
leading Ss to self-
or peer- correct in
your transcripts.

26. The Quality of Classroom Life
If the goal is proficiency development, classroom interaction is only
useful if it helps Ss improve proficiency.
Classroom discourse must be optimized to enhance the quality of
classroom life of a particular T and Ss.
In other words, all CI and CD depend on a unique context. So the
right way to teach is to become adept at planning CI and CD
practices, and then making crucial decisions about changes in
practices on the fly.

27. Classroom Life is
Situated Discourse
Institutional
goals/Constraints
Participant
goals/constraints
TASK of the
exchange
Relative positions
of participants

28. Affective Dimension
Number • S involvement
and kind • Mutual respect
• Individually personalized
of Ss‟ questions
discourse • Ss feel like individuals
• Affirmation of ss responses (real
depend listening/consideration)
on an • Use ss response in next
teaching moments
ethos of

29. Mother Tongue Use
As much as
As little as necessary
necessary (Ss
(when there is
should not feel
another way, use it)
discouraged in class)

30. T Identity  Discourse style
T is sole legitimate
knowledge provider
A T who knowingly
creates monologic
classroom discourse
believes Ss cannot self-acquire
knowledge
A T‟s beliefs about
teaching dictate
his/her classroom
discourse style
Meaning is interactively
constructed
A T who knowingly
creates dialogic
Based on your classroom discourse
believes
transcripts, where is Authority for learning is
your classroom shared (distributed)
discourse style along
the monologic  
Dialogic continuum?

31. T-identity in Asian (Chinese) contexts
Transmission mode (T talks,
ss listen)
Emphasize language points -
test
No actual L2 use
Teach as they were taught
(little professional
development)
L2 use is unimportant
L2 linguistic knowledge is
important - test

32. S- Identity in Asian (Chinese)
contexts
• Traditional values:
• Reticent • Face
• collective > individual (“1
• Reluctant should not bother
• Unvolunteering others”)
• modesty (no showing
• Uninitiating off/going first)
• Unanswering • respect of elders/seniors
(no
Characteristics • Brief replying challenge/address, eye
• Respect T and
Causes contact)
• Learned school practice
textbook • T‟s Discourse style
• Limiting range of low-
level Qs
• Minimal wait-time
Share moments where ss‟ interaction is unimpressive.
What do you think are the causes? How can you fix
these moments?