Children’s Knowledge-in-Interaction 2016
DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-1703-2_11
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sparkling, Wrinkling, Softly Tinkling: On Poetry and Word Meaning in a Bilingual Primary Classroom

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Against the backdrop of the monolingual English-only policy, this is an important observation because it shows the potential benefits of bilingual instructional interaction (cf. Huq et al, 2017;St. John, 2010;Ustunel & Seedhouse, 2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Against the backdrop of the monolingual English-only policy, this is an important observation because it shows the potential benefits of bilingual instructional interaction (cf. Huq et al, 2017;St. John, 2010;Ustunel & Seedhouse, 2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here, the teacher's verbal actions are in English, save for the tagged-on particle in line 6. As Huq et al (2017) have demonstrated in a different bilingual Bengali setting, teachers produce such turn-final comprehension checks in Bengali, which results in momentary instances of language alternation within an otherwise monolingual English medium of interaction (cf. teacher-initiated self-policing in Amir 2013b).…”
Section: Monolingual Medium Of Interactionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, some studies have focused on student-initiated LA in response to e.g. teacher questions (Liebscher & Dailey-O'Cain, 2005;Ziegler, Sert & Durus, 2012; see also Huq, Cromdal & Barajas, 2017). Üstünel and Seedhouse (2005) examine teacher-student CS in relation to pedagogical focus in an EFL classroom at a Turkish university (see also Üstünel, 2004; Üstünel, 2016).…”
Section: Language Policy and Normsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the previous section has shown, cognitivist approaches to teaching and learning vocabulary frame learning as occurring within the individual and consequently focus on course design, and planned vocabulary teaching in particular. However, in spite of an increase in the volume of vocabulary research and agreement as to the importance of lexical components of curricula, there is still a significant gap in our understanding of how vocabulary teaching and learning actually plays out in the complex dynamic of the classroom floor (Waring, Creider & Box, 2013; see also Huq et al, 2017). How are abstract concepts like "comprehensible input", "negotiation for meaning" (Long, 1983;Swain & Lapkin, 1998) and "meaningful encounters with words" (Lightbown & Spada, 2013, p. 62) enacted and displayed on a turn-by-turn basis in practice?…”
Section: Interaction-oriented Studies Of Vocabularymentioning
confidence: 99%