1 / 23

Inspiring storybook reading environments respond to children

Inspiring storybook reading environments respond to children. Amelia Church and Bridie Raban The University of Melbourne Early Childhood Australia National Conference 30 September 2010. Chief Investigators:

inga
Download Presentation

Inspiring storybook reading environments respond to children

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Inspiring storybook reading environments respond to children Amelia Church and Bridie RabanThe University of MelbourneEarly Childhood Australia National Conference 30 September 2010

  2. Chief Investigators: Associate Professor Margaret Brown (Principal Investigator), Associate Professor Esther Care, Professor Bridie Raban, Professor Field Rickards, Mr Terry O’Connell (Australian Scholarships Group) Research team: Associate Professor Brown (Team leader), Ms Emelie Barringer, Dr Anna Bortoli, Mr Robert Brown, Dr Linda Byrnes, Associate Professor Care, Ms Esther Chan, Dr Amelia Church, Ms Jan Deans, Ms Lucy Jackson, Dr Anne-Marie Morrissey (now at Deakin University), Dr Andrea Nolan (now at Victoria University), Dr Louise Paatsch (now at Deakin University), Mr Derek Patton, Professor Raban, Dr Maria Remine, Dr Janet Scull, Ms Lena Tan, Ms Jessica Taylor and Dr Linda Watson (Birmingham University, UK) Funding Support: Australian Scholarship Group (ASG); Australian Research Council (ARC): Linkage Projects funding scheme (Project number LP0883437);Melbourne Graduate School of Education, The University of Melbourne

  3. Aims of the study http://www.edfac.unimelb.edu.au/younglearners/ To investigate child characteristics, family and pedagogical practices that support early literacy development in 4-year-old kindergarteners To identify how parents and teachers engage with and scaffold children’s early literacy development To document the emergence of early literacy To develop instruments to assist teachers to understand children’s early literacy capacities To identify pedagogical strategies for teacher education programmes

  4. Analytic framework • Shared bookreading • Print knowledge (Justice et al, 2009) • Extend vocabulary (Dickinson & Tabors, 2001) • Opportunities for decontextualised talk (Hindman et al, 2008) • 2. Teacher-child interactions • Initiation/Response/Evaluation (Mehan, 1979) • ‘Sustained shared thinking’ (Siraj-Blatchford and Manni, 2008) • 3. An emic approach • Conversation analysis (Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, 1974; • Erickson, 2004; Goodwin & Kyratzsis, 2007; Butler, 2008; Church, 2009; Maryanne Theobald at 3.30pm today in Meeting Room 4!)

  5. ECT: i want [you] to use your sensible thinking • [about what's coming up]= • Eri: [can i sa:y some:thing]. • ECT: =okay? (.) what's rhyming. • (0.8) • Eri: [(.hhh-)], ((moving towards book)) • ECT: >[(hold on)] you can tell me in a second<. i will noteat them in a hou:se? i- >uh sorry< i will not eat them here or there i will not eat the:m?=

  6. Overview Why focus on child-initiated utterances in reading events? How do teachers respond to child-initiated utterances? What are the implications of these responses in creating inspiring environments for children’s learning?

  7. Turn transition relevant places • Xav: he's saying "c c c c ". • ECT: he's go- storming o:ff, those are bubbles they're notc's. (0.5) • he's [storming off] with a grumpy look. • Eri: [why there-] • Eri: why there are bubbles. • ECT: would you could you in a ca:r (.) eat them eat themhere they are.

  8. Contingency (semantic/pragmatic) • ECT: “I’m drawing a: haterpillar (.) um: I mean acaterpillar” answered Jenny. • Gen: hehhe (0.2) $it’s a haterpillar because she’s got a haton$. • ECT: hehehum $.hhhh “oh dear” sighed her mother.

  9. Contingency (inference) • ECT: that night (0.3) he had a stomach ache. • ( ): [x x ] • And: [from ea]ting all of that. • ECT: yeah (0.7) so: full.

  10. Teacher responses to child-initiated turns expansion  response

  11. Example 1.  response • ECT: show me the- pretend you’re a wild thing. • (1.5) ((all children use hands as claws)) • ECT: [that’s it.] • Mir: [(I think that] thing is something else. • (0.4) • ECT: but Max stepped into his private boat,

  12. Example 2.  response • ECT: a tv antenna? • Kar: that looks pretty¿ • (0.3) • ECT: and a shiny pan.

  13. Example 3.  response • ECT: it’s just the noise the shell makes when you put itagainst your ea:r. • (1.0) • Bil: the sea: came out of the shell .hhh (they are) x x. • (1.1) • ECT: but David knew where there had been a sea in hisbedroom.

  14. Example 4.  response • Xav: he's saying "c c c c ". • ECT: he's go- storming o:ff, those are bubbles they're notc's. (0.5) • he's [storming off] with a grumpy look. • Eri: [why there-] • Eri: why there are bubbles. • ECT: would you could you in a ca:r (.) eat them eat themhere they are.

  15. Example 5. Minimal response • ECT: “I’m drawing a: haterpillar (.) um: I mean acaterpillar” answered Jenny. • Gen: hehhe (0.2) $it’s a haterpillar because she’s got a haton$. • ECT: hehehum $.hhhh “oh dear” sighed her mother.

  16. Example 6. Minimal response • ECT: that night (0.3) he had a stomach ache. • ( ): [x x ] • And: [from ea]ting all of that. • ECT: yeah (0.7) so: full.

  17. Example 7. Minimal response • ECT: and a person called Maurice wrote this story, • Tom: hmm? • Jak: [ Maurice! ] • ECT: [and they’ve-] Maurice yeah and >he • [was clever because he-<] • Bec: [ it’s close to ] Hori:ce. • ECT: it is close to Horice (.) and he did the pictures too.

  18. Example 8. Minimal response • ECT: i do not [like them:?] • [‘x’ for m]e::. • (0.3) • ( ): a:[nywhe:re.] • ECT: [anywhere.] • Xav: but (.) there's a 'xyz''X' for ↑me::. • ECT: an 'X' for you:? (0.7) you do not like green eggs and↑ham,

  19. Extending - Extract A

  20. Extending - Extract B

  21. Conclusions • Children’s contributions to the ongoing activity display communicative competencies in addition conceptual understanding. • Teachers typically orient to an existing pedagogic script, privileging of the goals of the task in favour of children’s orientation to the task. Learning how to do institutional interaction in favour of learning about literacy? (see Pike, 2010) • Extending child-initiated utterances – while not always possible – provides the very essence of ‘teachable moments’

  22. Acknowledgments Email: achurch@unimelb.edu.au • The teachers and children participating in the Young Learners’ Project • Colleagues in the Young Learner’s Project • The University of Melbourne Early Career Researcher Grant • The Vera Scantlebury Brown Memorial Trust Research Scholarship

More Related