The Function of Student Imperatives in Small-Group Interaction

• In Event: Student Coregulation in Small-Group Learning

Abstract

Introduction
When considering the inherent complexity of the elementary school classroom, it is not difficult to understand how critical effective communication is to the learning process. This is also demonstrated by the massive extant literature addressing teachers’ language use and the impact it has on students’ learning. However, classroom discourse is not limited solely to teacher-student interaction. Within the context of small group cooperation in the classroom, student to student dialogue is the central mode of communication. Working in groups requires cooperation in order to fulfill a task, with limited input from the teacher. Therefore, it becomes necessary to consider the influence of student language use on the learning process. Of the many parts of speech demonstrated by the groups, the analysis presented here examines students’ use of imperatives.
Methods
Since the simple definition of imperatives includes connotations of command as well as authority, it was inferred that the use of imperatives would be most prevalent in groups with clear leadership. Groups in our sample in which leadership was present were identified. Groups 1 and 4 were selected based on these criteria for further analyses. Two lessons from each group were analyzed in one minute intervals. During these intervals, imperatives were recorded as they were used in the group as well as any responses.
Results
Group differences in the way students responded to imperatives were found. For Group 1, many imperatives were met with utterances of resistance, anger, or frustration from other group members. The responses had an air of annoyance, as if whoever uttered imperatives was nagging, or being bothersome. This suggests that the group members simply were not buying into the speaker’s assertion for leadership. In Group 4, however, the responses recorded were fewer in number and were responded to more light-heartedly. Group members giggled, or complied with a simple “okay,” even if the imperative could be construed as mean (such as “shut up!”). Despite the positive nature of the responses given by Group 4 members, responses to imperatives as a whole were few and far between (more in-depth examples will be provided in presentation).
Conclusion
Given the above findings, it can be argued that the function of student imperatives differs from the adult use of imperatives. In a typical classroom setting, a teacher utters imperatives with the expectation to either elicit a certain behavior, or bring about cessation of a certain behavior. Given the authority that teachers possess, the absolute effect they have on student behavior is understandable. However, this authority does not seem to be consistently present among peers in the small groups setting. Student imperatives are much less about a particular outcome than they are about demonstrating a student’s membership or agency in a group. For teachers seeking to utilize small groups, research focusing on the manner in which students communicate with one another is extremely important.

Authors

• Angela M. Labistre, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

• Erin Elizabeth Anderson, University of Arizona

• Lauren Ballard, The University of Arizona

• Christine Nicole Calderon, The University of Arizona

• Ruby Inez Vega, The University of Arizona

• Mary M. McCaslin, The University of Arizona