Observing Teacher-Student Interaction During Instruction: A Sociocultural Perspective

• In Event: Rounding the Sociocultural Turn in Research on Classroom Motivation

Abstract

Objectives. To examine patterns in teacher-student interaction over 2 years during an intervention supporting instructional strategies that foster students’ engagement in learning.

Theoretical framework. Sociocultural theory views teaching and learning not as individual phenomena, but as socially, culturally and historically situated. Tharp et al., 2000, have conceptualized teaching as “assisted performance,” emphasizing its joint, interpersonal, and dynamic nature. Tharp argues that assisting performance provides the opportunity to build common values and perceptions between students and teachers and thus supports learning and engagement. Following Tharp, we conceptualize teacher-student interaction as an indicator of the potential for student engagement.

Methods. Researchers observed 7 middle school classrooms 12 times in year 1 and 4 times in year 2, coding teacher-student interaction during instruction. Coding was completed for each activity setting during a lesson (activity settings were determined by a change in product, such as from journal writing to a science lab). The number of activity settings ranged from 1 to 3 per lesson.

Data sources. Two categories from the Activity Setting Observation Instrument (ASOS; Tharp, 2005) were coded. Teacher-student dialogue (T-SD) allows participants to define and negotiate tasks and co-construct meaning. It is coded when 1) both teacher and (one or more) student(s) have at least two speech turns each; 2) the turns are focused on a single subject; and 3) turns involve more than answering a question. Responsive assistance (RA) refers to scaffolding understanding. It is coded when the teacher: 1) monitors or tests to discover students' current level of performance /understanding; and 2) adjusts assistance to enable progress in the learning activity. Categories are coded as present/absent for each activity setting. Percentages were computed for each classroom; the number of “present” codes was divided by the number of activity settings during the year.

Results. Table 1 shows differences in the presence of RA and TS-D in years 1 and 2 by classroom.

Table 1
Classroom Responsive Assistance Teacher-Student Dialogue
Year 1 Year 2 Year 1 Year 2
1 SC 6 57% 67% 61% 50%
2 LA 8 71% 50% 67% 38%
3 SS 7 18% 63% 57% 75%
4 MA 8 62% 54% 38% 46%
5 SS 6 82% 100% 36% 75%
6 LA 7 51% 79% 31% 79%
7 SC 7 39% 100% 10% 75%
Average 54% 73% 43% 63%
Note: SC =science; LA =language arts; SS =social studies; MA =math

Increases were not statistically significant, but there were noticeable qualitative differences in classrooms between years 1 and 2. There were no grade level or subject matter differences. Examples of T-SD and RA across 2 years in classrooms 2 and 7 will be presented along with hypotheses for changes and the potential for student engagement.
`
Significance: The ASOS categories enabled us to capture both the quantity of teacher-student interaction and the quality of instruction. This approach (vs. measuring teacher or student behavior separately; Turner & Patrick, 2008) reveals how and why students might become (dis)engaged based on opportunities to participate with knowledgeable others and to co-construct meaning and value.

Authors

• Julianne C. Turner, University of Notre Dame

• Hayal Zeynep Kackar, University of Notre Dame