Transforming Talk And Phonics Practice: Or, How Do Crabs Clap?

Abstract

This article aims first to show how a teacher, working within a nationally proscriptive, standards-driven, mainstream context turns a formfocused phonics practice activity into a word game that engages the imagination, intellect, and identity of 5-6-year-old English language learners. Based on the assumption that teacher-student interactions are crucial for bilingual students' success at school (Cummins 2000, p. 6), the transformation in the 15-minute Literacy Hour word work activity is presented in terms of five key discourse threads related to (a) covering the curriculum, (b) surface justification, (c) deep justification through shared imaging, (d) shifting the locus of experience, and (e) playing the word game, each of which is explained by different theoretical perspectives, and each of which embodies different pedagogical principles. The subsequent discussion focuses on the fundamental changes in instructional and social assumptions about the nature of language, knowledge, learning, the curriculum, and student outcomes to explain how the traditional pedagogy implicit in the published activity develops into a constructive and then a transformative pedagogy (Cummins, 2001, p. 219). The article shows how pedagogical transformation works on multiple related assumptions and how these are realised in discourse threads weaved through the teacher-student interaction.

A Systematic Review of Teacher–Child Interactions With Multilingual Young Children

“…Peer interaction with same-language peers can act as a resource for understanding and participating in classroom activities. Gardner (2008) aimed to raise child engagement by adding a play element to a literacy activity. This gave children more control over the activity as they were treated as knowledgeable actors in the interaction with the teacher.…”

“…Two studies mention that because of the multilingual background of children, it might be hard for teachers to create the same opportunities in the classroom as for monolingual children. Gardner (2008) found that language activities took much longer in a linguistically diverse classroom, as multilingual children needed longer time to read, translation might be necessary, and the teacher took more time for word meanings. This created a tension between the requirement to cover the curriculum and the need to invest time in extended conversations with all students.…”

“…Ping (2014) found that children would give the same level of responses as the teacher prompts even though they were still acquiring the language. In the study by Gardner (2008), the teacher challenged the children to explain and justify their answer, rather than giving a yes/no answer. Furthermore, the use of nonverbal communication, such as gestures (Park, 2014;Rosborough, 2014), and materials (e.g., tangible examples, classroom attributes; Vine, 2006) in the interaction was found to be useful in helping multilingual children in their language development.…”

“…Six studies described strategies to create extended discourse and support language development (Dolley & Wheldall, 1991;Gardner, 2008;Ping, 2014;Sayer, 2013;Sherris, 2011;Tsybina et al, 2006). The teachers in the study by Ping (2014) primarily used wh-prompts (i.e., use of "what," "where," and "why" questions) to encourage children to contribute to the interaction.…”

“…She used simple yes/no questions to open up the conversation but moved on by asking for clarification to let the child explain more and for repetition to check for understanding. Likewise, in the study by Gardner (2008), the teacher challenged the children to explain and justify their answer, rather than giving a yes/no answer.…”