Patterns in Social Studies Discussions Facilitated by Early Career Teachers

• In Event: Portraits of Growth: How Novice Social Studies Teachers Develop as Discussion Facilitators

Abstract

Objectives
Although the absence of classroom discussion is well-documented, we know little about what teachers who attempt to facilitate discussion actually do. In this paper, we explore the nature and quality of social studies discussions in video recordings (N=190) of novice and early career teachers. We seek to understand (a) whether and how teachers’ practice, on average, changed as they gained more experience and (b) whether there exist different profiles of discursive patterns that characterize social studies discussions in novice and early career classrooms.

Method
Data are 15-min video recordings (N=190) of classroom discussion collected from social studies teachers (N=37) in their preservice through third year teaching. Teachers were free to submit any video that they believed constituted discussion. Videos were scored using the Social Studies Discourse Instrument (SSDI).
We fit two-level hierarchical linear growth models (HLM) in which videos were nested within teachers (Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002). For each HLM, we regressed video scores against an indicator for time of video and included random effects for time and for teacher. Separate HLMs were fit using the average dimension scores.
We also conducted latent profile analysis (LPA; Hennig et al., 2015; Pastor et al., 2007) to identify groups or “profiles” of videos in the sample. LPA considers profile membership as an unobserved categorical variable and estimates the probability that an individual or unit belongs to a profile using patterns of variables (called LPA indicators) (Spurk et al., 2020). Profiles of social studies discussions that share similar patterns of variables were identified and these were compared with other profiles (Collins & Lanza, 2013; Wang & Hanges, 2011).

Findings
We found significant positive change, on average, for teachers as they moved from their preservice to 3rd year teaching. Analysis of teacher growth by dimension indicated that discussions improved in the questions teachers posed (ASK) and the dialogic (CO-CONSTRUCT, CRITIQUE) and substantive (CONTENT, EMPATHIC IMAGINATION, ETHICAL ACTION) nature of student talk. We did not see differences in teachers’ active facilitation (PRESS, LINK) or interrogation of sources (SOURCE SCRUTINY), suggesting that, on average, the teachers with more experience were better able to design discussion scaffolds that prompted student discourse, but not necessarily facilitate the discourse as it emerged nor prompt students to interrogate sources.
Results from latent profile analysis, however, reveal a more complex portrait of the discussions teachers facilitated. We identified eight profiles of social studies discussions, that distinguished teacher-led recitations (Class 1) from highly dialogic discussions (Class 7) from discussions with high teacher facilitation and student participation but little tension or critique (Class 4). Importantly, each profile contained videos representing the full range of teaching experience in our sample. We illustrate each class of discussion with examples from our data.

Significance
This study offers the first broad portrait of novice teacher discussion facilitation in social studies. Our findings indicate novice and early career teachers enact a range of instructional activities they conceive to be discussions, suggesting they would benefit from a more fine-grained specification of social studies discussion.

Authors

• Abby Reisman, University of Pennsylvania

• Wendy Chan, University of Pennsylvania

• Andrew J. Schiera, University of Colorado - Boulder

• Lightning Jay, Binghamton University - SUNY

• Timothy Patterson, Temple University

• Jenni Conrad, Oregon State University

• Andrew del Calvo, Rutgers University - New Brunswick

• Lindsey Graham, University of Pennsylvania

• Tiferet Ani, University of Pennsylvania

• Ariana Zetlin, University of Pennsylvania