SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Academy Journal of Educational Sciences / 2026 / Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1

Contextual Exploration of the Implementation-based Enactments of Teacher Questions in the Early Childhood Period

Erken Çocukluk Döneminde Öğretmen Sorularının Uygulama Bazlı Kullanımlarının Bağlamsal Olarak İncelenmesi

Kübra Demir(İSTANBUL AYDIN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-2110-3012
Yilmaz Soysal(İSTANBUL AYDIN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1352-8421
Pages
63–80
Publication Date
2020-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Various educational recommendations were offered for the professional development of preschool teachers, especially in the context of teacher noticing.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of the current study was to explore the questions staged by an early childhood teacher during in-class teaching processes by a contextual and implementation-based manner.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The participants of the study were an early childhood educator and 16 children (60-72 months).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Various educational recommendations were offered for the professional development of preschool teachers, especially in the context of teacher noticing.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:erken çocukluk eğitimi · öğretmen soruları · öğretmen farkındalığı

Abstract

The purpose of the current study was to explore the questions staged by an early childhood teacher during in-class teaching processes by a contextual and implementation-based manner. The participants of the study were an early childhood educator and 16 children (60-72 months). In-class implementations were video-recorded and analysed through systematic observation approach as a branch of sociocultural discourse analysis. Through a data-based and theoryladen coding catalogue (Teacher Questions Coding Catalogue), teacher-led questions were labelled in seconds and/or minutes intervals. The discursive functions of the teacher-led questions were gathered around seven categories and 28 sub-categories: communicating questions, monitoring (framing) questions, legitimating questions, challenging questions, evidencing questions, observe-compare-predict questions, and inferencing (deducing) questions. In addition, it was observed that the typologies and proportions of the enacted questions were moderately or substantially affected by the differences between the students' everyday social languages that were brought to the classroom environment by the learners and the social language of the school science that the teacher tried to take the pupils. It was also concluded thematically-oriented specifications of the contents under negotiation during the in-class implementations seemed to change the types and proportions of the teacher-led questions. Various educational recommendations were offered for the professional development of preschool teachers, especially in the context of teacher noticing.

Özet

Bu araştırmanın amacı bir erken çocukluk eğitimcisinin sınıf içi öğretimsel süreçlerde kullandığı soruların uygulama bazlı ve bağlamsal olarak incelenmesidir. Araştırmanın katılımcılarını bir erken çocukluk eğitimcisi ve 16 çocuk (60-72 aylık) oluşturmaktadır. Sınıf içi uygulamalar görsel olarak kaydedilmiş ve sosyokültürel söylem analizinin bir kolu olan sistematik gözlem yaklaşımıyla analiz edilmiştir. Veri temelli ve teori yönelimli katalog (Öğretmen Soruları Kodlama Kataloğu) aracılığıyla öğretmen soruları saniye ve/veya dakika aralıklı kodlanmıştır. Soruların söylemsel işlevleri yedi kategori ve 28 alt kategori altında toplanmıştır: iletişimsel sorular, izleme soruları, değerlendirme amaçlı sorular, çeldirme amaçlı sorular, delillendirme soruları, gözlem-karşılaştırma-tahmin soruları ve çıkarım amaçlı sorular. Ayrıca gözlemlenen soru türevlerinin ve oranlarının uygulama bazlı olacak şekilde öğrenenlerin sınıf ortamına getirdikleri kendi, acemi günlük dilleri ile öğretmenin öğrenenleri götürmeye çalıştığı bilimin sosyal dili arasındaki farklılıklardan ciddi derecede etkilendiği gözlemlenmiştir. Buna ek olarak uygulamalardaki müzakere edilen tematik içeriğin özelliğinin öğretmenin sorularının türevlerini ve oranlarını değiştirebileceği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Özellikle öğretmen farkındalığı bağlamında okul öncesi öğretmenlerinin mesleki gelişimleri adına çeşitli önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Demir, K., Soysal, Y. (2020). Contextual Exploration of the Implementation-based Enactments of Teacher Questions in the Early Childhood Period. Academy Journal of Educational Sciences, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1, 63–80. https://doi.org/10.31805/acjes.752805

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (79)

  1. Atay, Y. (2003). Öğretmen Adaylarına Yansıtmayı Öğretmek: Portfolyo Çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi., 508-527.
  2. Bay, N., & Alisinanoğlu, F. (2012, Aralık). Okul Öncesi Eğitimi Öğretmenlerine Uygulanan Soru Sorma Becerisi Öğretim Programının Ögretmenlerin Sorularının Bilişsel Taksonomisine Etkisi. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(3), 80-93.
  3. Bakhtin, M. (1934). Discourse in the novel. The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Michael Holguist and Caryl Emerson Austin: University of Texas.
  4. Barnhart, T., & van Es, E. (2015). Studying teacher noticing: Examining the relationship among pre-service science teachers' ability to attend, analyze and respond to student thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 83-93.
  5. Blatchford, I., & Mani, L. (2008). Would You Like to Tidy Up Now? An Analysis of Adult Questioning in the English FOundation Stage. Early Years, 28(1), 5-22.
  6. Berland, L. K., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for Scientific Argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 68-94.
  7. Boyd, M., & Galda, L. (2011). Real talk in elemantary classroms: Effective oral language pactice. New York: The Guilford Press.
  8. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4), 193-332.
  9. Cheminais, R. (2008). Every child matters. a practical guide for teaching assistants. New York: Reutledge Pres.
  10. Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate prductive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815-843.
  11. Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Studets question: a potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 41(1), 1-39.
  12. Dantonio, C. (1990). How can we create thinkers? Questioning strategies that work for teachers. Bloomington IN: National Educational Service.
  13. De Rivera, C., Girolametto, J., & Weitzman, E. (2005). Children’s Responses to Educators’ Questions in Day Care Play Groups. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14, 14-26.
  14. de Rivera, C., Girolametto, L., Greenberg, I., & Weitzman, E. (2005). Children’s responses to educators’ questions in day care play. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14(1), 14-26.
  15. DeVries, R., Zan, B., Hildebrant, C., Edmiaston, R., & Sales, C. (2002). Development constructivist early childhood cirriculum. New York: Teacher College Press.
  16. Dovigo, F. (2016). Argumentation İn Preschool: A Common Ground For Collaborative Learning In Early Childhood. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 24(6), 818-840.
  17. Doblaev, L. (1984). Studieteksten lezen en begrijpen (Reading and understanding stud texts). Netherlands: van Walraven.
  18. Erickson, F. (2011). Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers' eyes. New York: Routledge.
  19. Engle, R., & Contant, F. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instuction, 20(4), 399-483.
  20. Fairbain, D. (1987). The art of questioning your students. The Clearing House, 61(1), 19-22.
  21. Fraenkel, J.R & Wallen, N.E (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed). New York. McGraw-hill.
  22. Franke, M., & Kazemi, E. (2001). Teaching as Learning within Community of Practice: Characterizing Generative Growth. In T.
  23. Ford, M. J. (2008). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92(3), 404- 423.
  24. Gall, M. (1984). Synthesis of research on teachers' questioning. Educational Leadership, 42(3), 40-47.
  25. Gelfuso, A., & Dennis, D. (2014). ). Getting reflection off the page: the challenges of developing support for pre-service teacher reflection. Teaching and Teacher Education, 38(1), 1-11.
  26. Good, T., & Brophy, J. (1970). Teacher-child dyadic interactions: A new method of classroom observation. Journal of School Psychology, 8(2), 131-138.
  27. Harlen, W. (1999). Effective teaching of science: A review of research. Edinburgh. Scotland: Council for Reasearch in Education.
  28. Haves, R., & Matusov, E. (2005). Designing for dialoJegede, O., & Olajide, J. (1995). Wait‐time, classroom discourse, and the influence of sociocultural factors in science teaching. Science Education, 79(3), 233-249.
  29. John-Steiner, V., & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian Framework. Educational Psychological, 31(3/4), 191-206.
  30. Johnston, J., Halocha, J., & Chater, M. (2007). Developing teaching skills in the primary school. America: Open University Press.
  31. Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1983). Power in staff development through research on training. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  32. Kei, W., & Wong, V. (2013). Metacognition in 3-6 Years Old: Evidence from a Kindergarden in Hong Kong. Asia Pasific Journal of Research ın Early Chilhood Education, 7(1), 1-29.
  33. Kiemer, K., Gröschner, A., Pehmer, A.-K., & Siedel, T. (2015). Effects of a classroom discourse intervention on teachers' practice and students' motivation to learn mathematics and science. Learning and Instruction, 35, 94-103.
  34. Klein, E., Hammrich, P., Bloom, S., & Ragins, A. (2000). Language Development and Science İnquiry: The Head Start on Science and Communication Program. Early Chilhood and Practice, 2(2), 1-22.
  35. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturlalistic inquiry Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
  36. MacNaughton, G., & Williams, G. (2004). Teaching young chıldren choices in teory and practice. Australia: Ligare Pty. Ltd.
  37. Massey, S. L. (2004). Teacher–Child Conversation in the Preschool Classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 31(4), 227-231.
  38. Massey, S., Pence, K., Justice L.M, & Bowles, R. (2008). Educators’ use of cognitively challenging questions in economically disadvantaged preschool classroom contexts. Early Education and Development, 19(2), 340-360.
  39. Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: How we use language to think together. London: Routledge.
  40. Mercer, N. (2008). The seeds of time: Why classroom dialogue needs a temporal analysis. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(1), 33-59.
  41. Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education: Revised and expanded from case study research in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  42. Morris, A., Hiebert, J., & Spitzer, S. (2009). Mathematical knowledge for teaching in planning and avuluating instruction: what can preservice teachers learn? Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 40(5), 491-529.
  43. Piaget, J. (1997). The moral judgement of the child. Simon and Schuster.
  44. Pontecorvo, C., & Sterponi, L. (2002). Learning to Argue and Reason Through Discourse in Educational Settings. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 4 19-29.
  45. Oers, v., Wardekker, E., & van der Veer, R. (2010). The transformation of learning. Advances in cultural-historical activity theory. Cambridge University Press: Reissue Edition.
  46. Santagata, R., Zannoni, C., & Stigler, J. (2007). The role of lesson analysis in pre-service teacher education: An empirical investigation of teacher learning from a virtual video-based field experience. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10, 123-140.
  47. Savage, L. (1998). Eliciting critical thinking skills through questioning. Clearing House, 71(5), 291-293.
  48. Sherin, M., Jacobs, V., & Philipp, R. (2011). Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers' eyes. Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(2), 123-140.
  49. Soysal, Y. (2018). Determining the Mechanics of Classroom Discourse in Vygotskian Sense: Teacher Discursive Moves Reconsidered. Research in Science Education, 1-25.
  50. Soysal, Y. (2019). Fen Öğretiminde Öğretmenin Söylemsel Hamlelerinin Öğrenenlerinin Akıl Yürütme Kalitelerine Etkisi: Söylem Analizi Yaklaşımı. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 7(3), 994-1032.
  51. Soysal, Y. (2019). Yüksek Öğretimin İlkeleri Üzerine Pedagoji Temelli Bir Söylem Analizi Vygotskyci Perspektif İstanbul:Yüksek Öğretim Çalışmaları ve Araştırma Merkezi
  52. Soysal, Y. (2020). Establishing the norms of the Vygotskian teaching in the science classroom. Elemantary Education Online, 19(3), 1838-1857.
  53. Soysal, Y., & Radmard, S. (2018). Sınıf Yönetimi Olgusunun Pedagoji, Otorite Tipleri Söylemsel Güç İlişkileri Bağlamında Yeniden Değerlendirilmesi. Ulusal Eğitim Akademisi Dergisi, 2(2), 59-85
  54. Star, J., & Strickland, S. (2007). Learning to observe: Using video to improve preservice teach ers' ability to notice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11, 107-125.
  55. Steiner, R. (1973). Antroposophical Leading Thoughts. md. 1-37
  56. Storey, S. (2004). Teacher Questioning to İmprove Early Chıldhood Reasoning. Doctor of Philosophy (Doctoral Thesis), Department of Teaching and Teacher Education in Arizona University.
  57. Tsung-Hui, T., & Wei-Ying, W. (2008). Preschool teacher-child verbal ınteractions in science teaching. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 12(2), 2-23.
  58. van der Veen, C., van Kruistum, C., & Michaels, S. (2015). Productive Classroom Dialogue as an Activity of Shared Thinking and Communicating: A Commentary on Marsal. Mind Culture and Activity, 24(4), 320-325.
  59. van Kleeck, A., Vander Woude, J., & Hammet, L. (2006). Fostering literal and inferential language skills in Head Start preschoolers with language impairment using scripted book-sharing discussions. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15(1), 85-95.
  60. van Oers, B. (2012b). Meaningful cultural learning by imitative participation: The case of abstract thinking in primary school. Human Development, 55, 136-158.
  61. Vogler, J. (2005). Improve your verbal questioning. The Clearing House, 14(2), 98-103
  62. Wegerif, R. (2008). Reason and dialogue in education. B. van Oers, W. Wardekker, E. Elbers, & R. van der Veer içinde, The Transforming of Learning (s. 273-285). Cambridge.
  63. Vygotsky, L. (1987). Imagination and its development in childhood. The collected works of LS Vygotsky, 1, 339-350.
  64. Yolder, P., Davies, B., Bishop, K., & Munson, L. (1994). Effect of adult continuing wh-questions on conversational participation in children with developmental disabilities. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 37-1, 193-203.
  65. Zucker, T., Justice, L., Piasta, S., & Kaderavek, J. (2010). Preschool teachers’ literal and inferential questions and children's responses during whole-class shared reading. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25(1), 65-83.
  66. Wilen, W., & Clegg, A. (1986). Effective questions and questioning: A research review. Theory & Research in Social Education, 14(2), 153-161.
  67. Wood, B. S. Nelson, & J. Warfield (Eds.), Beyond Classical Pedagogy. Teaching Elemantary School Mathematics, 47-74.
  68. Wragg, E., & Brown, G. (2001). Questioning in the Primary School (Successful Teaching). London: Routledge Falmer.
  69. Atay, Y. (2003). Öğretmen Adaylarına Yansıtmayı Öğretmek: Portfolyo Çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi., 508-527.
  70. Barnhart, T., & van Es, E. (2015). Studying teacher noticing: Examining the relationship among pre-service science teachers' ability to attend, analyze and respond to student thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 83-93.
  71. Boyd, M., & Galda, L. (2011). Real talk in elemantary classroms: Effective oral language pactice. New York: The Guilford Press.
  72. De Rivera, C., Girolametto, J., & Weitzman, E. (2005). Children’s Responses to Educators’ Questions in Day Care Play Groups. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14, 14-26.
  73. Franke, M., & Kazemi, E. (2001). Teaching as Learning within Community of Practice: Characterizing Generative Growth. In T.
  74. Klein, E., Hammrich, P., Bloom, S., & Ragins, A. (2000). Language Development and Science İnquiry: The Head Start on Science and Communication Program. Early Chilhood and Practice, 2(2), 1-22.
  75. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturlalistic inquiry Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
  76. Oers, v., Wardekker, E., & van der Veer, R. (2010). The transformation of learning. Advances in cultural-historical activity theory. Cambridge University Press: Reissue Edition.
  77. Santagata, R., Zannoni, C., & Stigler, J. (2007). The role of lesson analysis in pre-service teacher education: An empirical investigation of teacher learning from a virtual video-based field experience. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10, 123-140.
  78. Sherin, M., Jacobs, V., & Philipp, R. (2011). Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers' eyes. Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(2), 123-140.
  79. Yolder, P., Davies, B., Bishop, K., & Munson, L. (1994). Effect of adult continuing wh-questions on conversational participation in children with developmental disabilities. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 37-1, 193-203.