Variations in science teaching modalities and students' pedagogic subject positioning through the discourse register and language code

Abstract

This study investigated the modalities of science teaching practice and students' pedagogic subject positioning through the linguistic features of science classroom discourse and the discursive interaction. For this purpose, this study sought to develop a methodology for classroom discourse analysis, the TMARC (Triangular Model of Analyzing discourse Register and language Code). Applied to a middle school science classroom, the TMARC revealed that there were six types of teaching modalities during the classroom practices in spite of the teacher's predominant didactic teaching and that there existed the diverse variation types of the teaching modalities according to a temporal order. In addition, we found four types of pedagogic subject positioning through the application of TMARC. We also argued that the pedagogic subject positioning of a successful science learner was implemented in the discourse language codes of personal collaborative open discourse, positional collaborated open discourse, and personal collaborative controlled discourse. Each of these related to the science teaching modality in which student centeredness was emphasized. Thus, this study suggests that a science teacher's competency related to managing classroom discourse can control students' pedagogic subject position and, by extension, contribute to students' science learning.

Multimodal teacher input and science learning in a middle school sheltered classroom

“…In that sense, the teacher discourse did not provide enough scaffolding to help the student discourse to reconstruct the science knowledge. Research in science classroom discourse shows that the teacher's management of the science discourse has a great impact on students' leaning (e.g., Jaipal, ; Maeng & Kim, ; Smart & Marshall, ). Generally, the science learning is promoted when student‐centeredness is emphasized.…”

Plan‐Draw‐Evaluate (PDE) pattern in students' collaborative drawing: Interaction between visual and verbal modes of representation

“…Multimodal meaning-making in the science classroom is often investigated from a discourse perspective in terms of the discursive interaction of coordinating talk, gesture, and other modes of representation (Tang et al, 2014). To investigate conversation in the science classroom, recent research has used a microgenetic approach that allows a closer examination of how the discourse progresses turn-by-turn as the utterances made by the participants unfolded (e.g., Jaipal, 2009;Kress et al, 2014;Maeng & Kim, 2011;Park & Song, 2020;Tang et al, 2011;Xu et al, 2020). In particular, researchers have paid attention to how conversation is shaped and built using multiple modes such as spoken language, physical actions, and so on, focusing on how these modes combine in the meaning-making process.…”

Teaching and Learning Science in Authoritative Classrooms: Teachers’ Power and Students’ Approval in Korean Elementary Classrooms

“…And they suggested the ways to improve the quality of talk in science classroom by understanding implicit ground rules. Maeng and Kim (2011) investigated the modalities of science teaching practice and students' pedagogic subject positioning through the linguistic features of science classroom discourse based on Bernstein's Code Theory. These researches have something in common in that they take critical viewpoints and concern hidden ideological effects in science classroom discourse.…”