1 / 20

Introduction to Conversation Analysis

Introduction to Conversation Analysis. Deng Feng Learning Science Lab, National Institute of Education, NTU Singapore. What happened here?. Mother: Who else is going to the party? Daughter : What do you mean?. What happened here?. Me: Can I help you with the chairs? She: Can

meghan-calderon
Download Presentation

Introduction to Conversation Analysis

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. Introduction to Conversation Analysis Deng Feng Learning Science Lab, National Institute of Education, NTU Singapore

  2. What happened here? • Mother: Who else is going to the party? • Daughter: What do you mean?

  3. What happened here? • Me: Can I help you with the chairs? • She: Can • Me: I can give you a hand • She: No need

  4. What is CA ? • Originated from sociology(Sacks, Schegloff, & Jeffson, 1978) • “talk-in-interaction”, “the details of talk and the indexicality and occasionedness of talk” (Wood & Kroger, 2000, Appendix, p. 200) • Works on “aspects of social life in the sense of people doing things together”(Have, 2002)

  5. What CA Concerns about? • What is said? (e.g. concerning on actual instances of talk-in-interaction) • How is said? (e.g. concentrating on the way people organize their talk) Which one is more powerful? Journal paper

  6. How to do CA? • Transcript (basic unit? Skills, 6:1-10:1? reliability) • Bottom-up approach • Line vs. turn • Strategy(Freebody,2003; Wood & Kroger, 2000) • Turns (dominant speaker? Interview? T-S: I-R-E?...) • Pauses (thinking? Embarrassment? Reluctance?...) • Troubles (how to fix? Self/other…) • Preference (Y vs. N) • Social categories (identity? subject teacher?)

  7. My experience on the assignment • Transcript generation( 4-10 minutes, typical, language difference?) • Introduction, objective, methodology, data analysis, conclusion and discussion, implication (Framework) • Feedback from two professors • Refinement (interviewer/ee)

  8. Introduction • Modeling-based scientific inquiry • Knowledge construction • Connection among content learning, inquiry, and epistemology of science (Clement, 2000; Gobert & Buckley, 2000; Penner, 2001) • Teacher: Key factor (David, Petish & Smithey, 2006) • Insufficient understanding and fairly poor skills (Justi & Gilbert, 2001; Justi & van Driel, 2006)

  9. Objective • Literature review • Teachers from Middle school, undergraduate • US… • Research question: What perception does a primary science teacher have of applying inquiry and modeling to science teaching

  10. Context • 40 P4 students, neighborhood school, Sg. • My Pals are Here: Science (Textbook, Federal Pub.) • Two topics: (researcher & teacher) • What affects the rate of evaporation? • What affects water quality? • Work in pairs (build-test-present models) • 16 30-mins periods, > 3 weeks + pre, post-test (1st topic)

  11. Enactment of Topic 1: “What affects evaporation?”

  12. Data Analysis • Transcript of video recording (context!!) • Post-interview • Two interview questions: (i) Have you changed your definition of what a model is? (ii) What are the things that you didn’t expect after going through this project by now? • Two big turns • Turn 1: L1 – L12 • Turn 2: L12 - L63

  13. two sub-questions: indirect speech acts(L1, L2) • no direct answer from the teacher (fail to recall her pre-definition) • “cannot remember” (REALLY? Unwillingness?) • trouble-repair(interruption, L3-4) • indirect answer to the definition of a model(mismatch, variable & model) • “Mm-hmm” (unwilling to continue the topic) • preference(preferred responses, “Right”, fixing the “trouble” and proceed) • implicitly express ideas: insufficient understanding (3-second pause)

  14. Confirmation(negative statements, carefulness, L15) • Trouble(paraphrase, self-initiate, self-repair, L18-19; ( “but” - “Right”, L41, L43 ) • Preference(L22, till L47) • Enhancement of evidence(other topic/subject, L23-26) • Pauses (time for organization of evidence, L20, L28-30) • Construction of social categories(from “I” to “we”, L32-37) (L54-57, researcher)

  15. Preference: • dispreferred response: “Mm”(L49, L59 : reluctant to talk more) • preferred response: “Mm-hmm, Ya”(L60) • time for preparation vs. available curriculum design

  16. Conclusion and Implication • Conclusion: • 1. The teacher’s understanding of a model needs further development (even over 3 weeks) • Due in part to novelty of the modeling-based pedagogy • 2. To teacher, amount of time needed is regarded as a salient concern for conducting such pedagogical activities

  17. Conclusion and Implication Implication • 1. Additional teacher professional development (understanding & skills) • 2. Advanced planning of the year-round SoW in incorporating the modeling-based inquiry cycle (proper topics, familiarity of software) • 3. Collaboration development

  18. Refinement Topic shift: • Resource vs. topic (interview) • Interviewer vs. interviewee • Active vs. reluctant Conclusion shift: • Dominant interviewer vs. passive respondent • Teacher control the main trend of the conversation • Both position themselves to a particular group Implication shift: • 80/20 or 90/10 • Researchers self-perception? From teachers’ perspectives

  19. Potential Application: • Science education • Daily classroom interaction (T/S-centered) • Problem-solving (various role) • Analysis of interview transcript

  20. Many thanks!! • Any feedback or comments?

More Related