Classroom Discourse Analysis/Part two/G1Students: Barouk Romeissa Teacher: Mr. Ayadi Karim Arfi Affaf Introduction:The birth of a new branch which is Discourse Analysis paved the way to overcome many problems that researchers have suffered from in various contexts such as in classroom context.1.Definition: Discourse Analysis is the study of how language in-use is affected by the context of its use (Rymes, 2008:13). Classroom Discourse Analysis deals with recording, transcribing ,and then analyzing the discourse to discover the communication gaps and deficits which lead to the misunderstanding(Rymes, 2008).2.Dimensions: 2.1The Social dimension: Social context has a broad influence on what is said inside the classroom since discourse and context each influence each other in a dialectic relationship. Language variation provides great misunderstanding. Social context includes several features which are: Gender Expectation, over determination, Racial and Ethnic background of the teacher, Reputation and Social class(Rymes , 2008:33-54) .For example:How are you? Takes the form of a question; however, in USA the phrase how are you? Functions as a greeting (Rymes, 2008:34, 35) .
2.2The interactional DimensionIt is the influence of interactional context on language function (as cited from Rymes, 2008:53).Predictable interactional context: adjacency pairs According to Rymes much of everyday student-teacher interaction is predictable as in such expert Good morning! good morning (2008:54),and he sees that such type of adjacency pairs which refers to a to two part interactional sequence in which the first part produces the expectation for the second part is important in driving interaction and if a person says something, the addressee must respond(2008:54,56).
Unpredictable interactional context: When teachers receive silence after asking questions means that their expectations for the second part of an adjacency pairs sequence have been foiled.Silence may be interpreted in different ways .karenGallas found that opening a science discussion by such question with over determined science terminology lead to silence. She argued tat using familiar words help in avoiding silence. for example, sayingwhere do dream come from? instead of saying what is gravity?. (As cited from Rymes 2008: 57-59)Creating new interactional context: interactional contingency According to Rymes it is the present potential for interaction to reshape the preceding individual utterances. If a teacher dismisses studentsideas , it ay lead to unpleasant result in the classroom. However, if a teacher is interested in what student s answer ,even if it isinaccurate , this student will be encouraged to participate (2008:59,60) 2.3-individual agency: According to Betsy Rymesindividual agency is personal control ;i.e., the ability to act in ways that produce desired outcomes(2008:64). Betsy Rymes has provided two major aspects concerning teachers individual agency:The first aspect is : Augmented Agency through awareness of social context: Teachers who have the ability to read characteristics of social context, while listening to their students, will choose which of those characteristics will influence classroom interaction .Betsy Rimes went further claiming that teachers have to try to conduct interactions according to their hopes for students rather than environments expectations(2008:65).As Georges teacher has done in the example of George as a Behaviour Problem who saw him as a child with potential to reshape the curriculum rather than a disruptive child(Rymes,2008:23,24).The second aspect is :Augmented Agency through awareness of interactional context :Rymes has provided that developing individual agency as a teacher often means letting students do the talking ,providing the opportunities for students to ask questions and provide each others with answers(2008:72).For the teachers to achieve what has been said before Thought Provoking Questions is one factor to be aware of(2008:70).Intelligent guiding, also, is needed from teachers as in the pupil Germains situation ,when his teacher didnt dismiss his wrong answer neither did she give him the right one ,but she ,perfectly, guided his thought for more thinking and participating(2008:61,62).
3.Sinclair and Coulthards rank scale:Sincalir and Coulthard have developed a rank scale of Hallliday to analyze discourse in classroom setting. The top of the rank scale is a lesson followed by transaction,then exchange ,move and act . (Dailey,2O1O,P.3)
LessonTransactionExchangeMoveAct(McCarthy,1992,P.22)rank scale:from the diagram we notice that acts are combined to form moves ,the latter are combined to form exchanges which themselves are so to form transaction and finally a lesson . In our research we are going to focus only on the inner levels of the rank scale: act :is the smallest and the lowest rank of discourse (Sinclair and Coulthard ,1992,P.8) move:there are five classes of moves which make up an exchange(Sincalir and coulthard,1992,P.8)a) Framing moves: are used to structure the lessonb) Focusing moves :are there to draw the studentsattention to the direction of the lessonc) Follow up moves : are said to be the most important ones.This type is used to know whether students have done what the teacher wanted them to do.d) Opening movese) Answering moves Exchange :is the combination of moves.the three main teaching exchanges described by Sinclair and Coulthard are :Informing , directing ,and eliciting exchanges . (1992,P.26-27) Informing exchange: takes place when the teacher needs to tell his student about new information. Directing exchange:the teacher expects from students to do, but not to say. Its most likely to be a non verbal response . Eliciting exchange: Sinclair and Coulthard state that : a typical exchange in the classroom consists of an initiation by the teacher , followed by a response (pupil) and followed by a feedback (again by the teacher ).(1992,P.3). this coined the term Inititiation, Response , and Feed back .(IRF).(Coulthard and Brazil,1992,P.65).There are many strategies that develop the interaction in the classroom. These are the most important : Maximize apportunities for students participant :From what have said before , it was the teacher who was dominating the classroom. The students were passive . Thats why the teacher should bear in mind that students who are learning language ,therefore,maximizing apportunities for students participation to let them dominate the classroom is necessary and so important. (Yu,2OO9,P.157) Involving more negociated interaction in classroom discourse: The best way to involve more negociated interaction (IRF) which means initiation opens the exchange , response constitutes a reply to the preceding initiation and feedback evaluates the preceding response and closes the exchange. The main purposes of negociated interaction in the classroom setting is to resolve interactive problems or to sustain the conversation in classroom.(Yu,2009,P.157) Conclusion:In sum, classroom discourse analysisis a cooperative event in which the teacher and the learner cooperate and negociate with each other in order to achieve certain goal in the classroom. References Sinclair ,J,andCoulthard ,M (1992) Towards an analysis of discourse. In Coulthard ,M. Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis. London and New York: Routledge . pp. 1-34. McCarthy,M. (1991) Dscourse Analysis for Lnguage Teachers. Great Britain: Cambridge University Press. Coulthard,M. and Brazil,D. (1992) Exchange structure In Coulthard, M. Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis. London and New York: Routledge .pp.50-78.