The Discourse of the Literacy Hour

Mroz, Maria; Smith, Fay; Hardman, Frank

doi:10.1080/03057640020004513

Cited by 86 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such hope has not materialised in practice. Instead research suggests there has been an increase in traditional whole class teaching -the Recitation (Mroz et al, 2000), where pupils have few opportunities to question or explore ideas to help them regulate their own thinking. In fact, the introduction of Literacy and Numeracy strategies often means that primary pupils spend all morning in tasks controlled by teachers.…”

Section: Whole Class Teachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dialogic Teaching: Discussing Theoretical Contexts and Reviewing Evidence from Classroom Practice

Lyle

2008

Language and Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Whole Class Teachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dialogic Teaching: Discussing Theoretical Contexts and Reviewing Evidence from Classroom Practice

Lyle

2008

Language and Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Current research in this area offers interesting insights in the students' conceptions and representations of specific academic activities and their role in the teaching and learning activities. Some students' and teachers' conceptions of written curriculum genres show that students may not follow the right strategies to promote meaning making by implementing these curriculum practices (Gemenne, 2001;Monereo et al, 1999;Mroz et al, 2000).…”

Section: Curriculum Genresmentioning

confidence: 97%

Writing and the Making of Meaning: An Introduction

Milian

Camps

2005

L1-Educ Stud Lang Lit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Subsequently the teachers' questions in this type of dialogue are primarily aimed at recitation of previously memorised information. Students' responses are evaluated in terms of correctness or conventionality (Mroz, Smith, & Hardman, 2000). This division of roles reflects the traditional division of power between teacher and students (Lemke, 1990), also associated with the instructional model of knowledge transmission.…”

Section: Interactivity In Different Models Of Learning and Instructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactivity with the interactive whiteboard in traditional and innovative primary schools: An exploratory study

Koster

Volman

Kuiper

2013

AJET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the main affordances of the interactive whiteboard (IWB) is its potential for increasing classroom interactivity, yet little is known about the interactivity it supports in schools with different educational concepts. In this study we analysed what types of wholeclass interactivity the IWB supports in schools with either a traditional or an innovative school concept. Interactivity was operationalized in terms of operation of the IWB, control of the IWB content, and the whole-class dialogue. A cross-case analysis of videotaped lesson observations revealed patterns in the interactivity related to school type. Comparison of the prevalent interactivity patterns at the two school types shows that students at the innovative schools had a more active role in the content of the IWB-supported lessons than those at the traditional schools. The students at the traditional schools operated the IWB more often, which coincided, however, with little or no student control of the IWB content and with whole-class dialogue that focused on knowledge transmission. At the innovative schools the active student role regarding lesson content did not coincide with student operation of the IWB. These findings indicate a link between the school's educational concept and the type of interactivity in IWB-supported lessons. IntroductionOver the past decade the interactive whiteboard (IWB) has proved to be a valuable tool for teaching and learning. Earlier research on the use of the IWB as a pedagogical tool mainly explored the potential it might hold for education, as Glover, Miller, Averis, and Door (2005) show in their literature review. More recent studies focus on the advantages and disadvantages of the IWB as an educational tool (Cutrim Schmid, 2008;Slay, Siebörger, & Hodgkinson-Williams, 2008;Somyürek, Atasoy, & Özdemir, 2009) or investigate how the IWB is actually being used in pedagogical settings (Smith, Hardman, & Higgins, 2006;Haldane, 2007;.Findings suggest that the IWB can be used to support different types of classroom interactivity. Although Smith et al. (2006) find in their study that the IWB is mostly used for whole-class teaching with a relatively high pace and frequent yet short student answers, other studies show that it can support both a teacher-directed and a more student-directed pedagogic approach to whole-class teaching (Gillen, Kleine Staarman, Littleton, Mercer, & Twiner, 2007). In this study we investigate what types of interactivity occur in IWB-supported lessons in schools with either a teacher-directed pedagogy or a student-directed pedagogy. Classroom interactivity supported by the IWBAfter the introduction of the IWB into the classroom arena, most studies focused on the use of the IWB to support whole-class lessons . More recent studies focus on the use of the IWB in individual and group work by students as well, for instance in collaborative tasks in which children share ideas about a topic .Its potential for supporting classroom interactivity is one of the main reasons given by teachers for adopting ...

show abstract

The Discourse of the Literacy Hour

Cited by 86 publications

References 10 publications

Dialogic Teaching: Discussing Theoretical Contexts and Reviewing Evidence from Classroom Practice

Dialogic Teaching: Discussing Theoretical Contexts and Reviewing Evidence from Classroom Practice

Writing and the Making of Meaning: An Introduction

Interactivity with the interactive whiteboard in traditional and innovative primary schools: An exploratory study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About