Quality Talk Interactions in Preschools

Quality Talk Interactions in Preschools by Derek Worley Patton University of Canterbury, New Zealand: BA 2005 M.Ed with Distinction 2007 PGDiploma (Child and Family Psychology) 2008 A thesis submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2015 Melbourne Graduate School of Education The University of Melbourne Produced on archival quality paper 2 ABSTRACT Teacher-child interactions in early childhood education settings can have a strong influence on children’s emerging literacy and language abilities which are essential for life-long learning and productive engagement in society. In this study, teacher-child quality talk interactions were examined from videos of three different teacher-led literacy activities in 23 preschool rooms in the children’s year before primary school - rooms selected for the preschools’ excellent reputation. A socio-cultural approach focusing on children learning to think is followed throughout. Specifically, participation by turns during episodes of Sustained Shared Thinking (SST) (Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2003) and complexity of talk in terms of Mean Length of Utterance (MLU) and Type Token Ration (TTR) were compared to ordinary talk. Teachers’ use of questions, acknowledgments, Gricean maxims and leadership of child concept development, or blending , were also counted. Based on these measures, six quality indicators were selected, averaged and used to rank rooms for further comparisons. Coded transcripts were subjected to a quantitatively dominant mixed methods analysis which found significant relationships within and between classes. Children’s MLU and TTR increased in SST talk, whereas teachers ranked higher tended to decrease their complexity of language while using a higher ratio of words in relation to the children, especially at the start of SSTs. Other indications of intentionality led to the conclusion that teachers higher on the overall ranking were more systematically purposeful in adjusting their goals, activities, and language than those of lower ranking. Quality talk in three distinct patterns emerged from among these same top ranked teachers. The approach used by the majority of teachers had high numbers of open questions and blends and was termed “Expansive” to capture iii the dialogic process and goal of concept development. A clearly defined minority approach using high numbers of closed questions and Gricean maxims was termed “Focusing” to capture the dialogic process and goal of refining the clarity of thinking encapsulated at the level of the utterance. A third approach did both, but with low levels of acknowledgements. The usefulness of distinguishing and gaining further understanding of these approaches for measuring and improving teacher-child talk interactions is discussed. iv DECLARATION This is to certify that: i. the thesis comprises only my original work towards the PhD, ii. due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used, iii. the thesis is fewer than 64,000 words in length, exclusive of tables, figures, bibliographies and appendices. Signed: ________________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________ v vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To my supervisors Associate Professor (AP) Janet Scull who was there the whole time, Professor Bridie Raban who led until her retirement, and Professor John Hattie who then stepped in for a critical reorientation and the final refinement, I offer my deepest gratitude for companioning me on a long journey of discovery with your excellence, patience and generosity of knowledge, time and attention. To AP David Beckett (Deputy Dean MGSE) thank you for insightfully guiding me to these extraordinary people and to Dr Terry Bowles for leadership of reviews and guidance on presenting results. To the Young Learners Project team within which my research was nested, my heartfelt thanks for your welcome, interest and sharing of ideas. The team was ably led by the steering committee of Professor Field Rickards (Dean MGSE), AP Margaret Brown (Chair), AP Esther Care, Professor Bridie Raban and Ms Renita Alani (Research Fellow and Coordinator) and assisted by other research team members Dr Anne Bartoli, Mr Robert Brown, Dr Linda Byrnes, Ms Esther Chan, Dr Amelia Church, Ms Jan Deans, Dr Anne-Marie Morrissey, AP Andrea Nolan, Dr Louise Paatsch, Dr Maria Remine, AP Janet Scull and Dr Linda Watson. To Marty, my wife and partner of 45 years, my gratitude for allowing me this challenge, taking over responsibility for everything else, encouragement, forbearance, love, extraordinary proofreading ability, knowing how to spell everything in four kinds of English and patiently checking transcripts. This is our joint achievement and a hallmark and high-mark of our effort toward the betterment of the world through the education of children. To my three daughters Erica, Carmel, and Melanie, my thanks for accepting my life efforts, your positive feedback and taking responsibility for your lives, setting me free to pursue this new career. To the Education Department of the University of Canterbury for accepting me into the Child and Family Psychology degree and accompanying me in starting a new career as a registered psychologist working with children, thanks. vii viii DEDICATION I dedicate this work firstly to my parents, both of whom specialized in engaging children. My mother graduated from Johns Hopkins Medical School, first as a paediatrician and then as a child psychiatrist, and exposed me to academic journals and thinking. She encouraged me by praising my effort and trained my mind by giving me things to read like Teilhard de Chardin’s The Phenomenon of Man (1959) when I was 12 years old. My father was a puppeteer turned photographer who specialized in children. The happy photos were simply the final evidence of a skilled engagement while setting up his equipment in their homes. My parents also wisely sent me to a John Dewey inspired primary school which was the “laboratory school” for the state of Maryland’s research on education and teacher training (Committee on history, 1941). My religious experience was Quaker, where we engaged in debates about the meaning of the Bible and life, on an equal footing with an adult “teacher”. After four years of an equally respectful sharing of minds at a Quaker co-ed boarding school, I entered a Quaker liberal arts college where I was greatly influenced by the writings of two Eastern philosophers. When my uncle heard I was planning to enrol in a course on education, he sent me a book by Krishnamurti (1955) who lived in his same small California town. I also dedicate this work to ‘Abdu’l-Bahá whose writings principally guided my engagement with my three daughters’ and seven grandchildren’s education for the last 40 years. About 100 years ago, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá finished a three-year tour of Western Europe, the United States and Canada where he spoke to many audiences including academics at places like Oxford, UK on topics such as education. “These children must be given a good training from their earliest childhood…[m]any elementary sciences must be made clear to them in the nursery; they must learn them in play, in amusement. Most ideas must be taught them through speech, not by book learning… Oral questions must be asked and the answers must be given orally… One child must question the other concerning these things, and the other child must give the answer… In this way, they will make great progress” (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, 1913/1916). The Cambridge scholar E. G. Browne co-published with this author (‘Abdu’l- Bahá & Browne, 1891) and the British conferred upon him a knighthood (KBE) in 1920 for services to the people of Palestine during the war. He seems to have predicted not only what could be done at nursery school age (learn science), but how it could be accomplished (through talk and questioning) and within what context (play and amusement). This reminds me to walk with humility down the pathways of knowledge, mindful to be curiously respectful of other cultural wisdom and allow it into my legitimizing purview. ix x TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................iii DECLARATION ............................................................................................... v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................. vii DEDICATION .................................................................................................. ix TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................. xi LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................... xiv LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................ xvi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................... 9 SECTION ONE: Historical development of early childhood education ........ 9 Opening the debate for alternative explanations .......................................... 15 Evidence supporting further theoretical shifts: 1960–1990 .......................... 17 Program type or process differences? ........................................................... 22 SECTION TWO: Recent developments ....................................................... 29 Vygotsky ......................................................................................................

Load more