Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 33 - Sayı: Özel Sayı

Teachers′ Demonstrations of Epistemic Access in Teacher-Student Interactions in a Digital Setting

Pages
238–260
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️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)

The findings in this paper shed light on interactional practices in relation to epistemics, as well as on interactional practices in a digital setting

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This paper is concerned with a Conversation Analytic (CA) study of teachers’ demonstrations of epistemic accessto a student’s domain or territory of information in teacher-student interactions in a digital setting.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It describes interactional practices analyzed in 12 excerpts with an explicit reference to information about students’ progress provided by the digital system.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings in this paper shed light on interactional practices in relation to epistemics, as well as on interactional practices in a digital setting
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This paper is concerned with a Conversation Analytic (CA) study of teachers’ demonstrations of epistemic accessto a student’s domain or territory of information in teacher-student interactions in a digital setting. It describes interactional practices analyzed in 12 excerpts with an explicit reference to information about students’ progress provided by the digital system. It will be shown that teachers initiate interactions about already fulfilled assignments that are shown to be problematic. In the opening of the interaction, teachers more or less explicitly refer to the digital programme as an information source and/or to the hitches in student’s progress. In the continuation of the interaction, teacher and student are concerned with a redoing of assignments. In this phase of the interaction, the teacher demonstrates epistemic access to possible causes for students’ mistakes. In all cases, students do not show resistance to teachers’ demonstrations of epistemic access to knowledge and experiences falling into their epistemic domain. The findings confirm teachers’ and students’ orientation to the educational context as being a specialized context where students’ problems are not treated as ‘theirs to know and describe’. The findings in this paper shed light on interactional practices in relation to epistemics, as well as on interactional practices in a digital setting

🔖

Cite This Article

GOSEN, M. N. (2022). Teachers′ Demonstrations of Epistemic Access in Teacher-Student Interactions in a Digital Setting. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 33 - Sayı: Özel Sayı, 238–260. https://ajindex.com/articles/531719

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Balaman, U., & Sert, O. (2017a). The coordination of online L2 interaction and orientations to task interface for epistemic progression. Journal of Pragmatics, 115, 115-129.
  2. Balaman, U. & Sert, O. (2017b). Development of L2 interactional resources for online collaborative task accomplishment. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(7), 601-630.
  3. Baldauf-Quilliatre, H., & de Carvajal, I. C. (2015). Is the avatar considered as a participant by the players? A conversational analysis of multi-player videogames interactions. PsychNology Journal, 13(2), 127-147.
  4. Baker, C. D., Emmison, M., & Firth, A. (Eds.) (2005). Calling for help: Language and social interaction in telephone helplines. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. Beck Nielsen, S. (2014). “I’ll just see what you had before” Making computer use relevant while patients present their problems. In: Nevile, M., Haddington, P., Heinemann, T., & Rauniomaa, M. (Eds.). (2014). Interacting with objects: Language, materiality, and social activity (pp. 80-97). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Bidin, S., & Ziden, A. A. (2013). Adoption and application of mobile learning in the education industry. ProcediaSocial and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 720-729.
  5. Çakır, M. P., Zemel, A., & Stahl, G. (2009). The joint organization of interaction within a multimodal CSCL medium. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(2), 115-149.
  6. Cekaite, A. (2009). Collaborative corrections with spelling control: Digital resources and peer assistance. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 319-341.
  7. Crompton, H. (2013). A historical overview of mobile learning: Toward learner-centered education. In Z.L. Berge & L.Y. Muilenburg (Eds.), Handbook of mobile learning (pp. 3-14). New York: Routledge. Crompton, H., Burke, D., & Gregory, K. H. (2017). The use of mobile learning in PK-12 education: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 110, 51-63.
  8. Davidsen, J., & Christiansen, E. (2014). Mind the hand: A study on children's embodied and multimodal collaborative learning around touchscreens. Designs for Learning, 7(1), 34-52.
  9. Davidson, C. (2009). Young children’s engagement with digital texts and literacies in the home: Pressing matters for the teaching of English in the early years of schooling. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 8(3), 36–54.
  10. Drew, P. (1981). Adults’ corrections of children’s mistakes: A response to Wells and Montgomery. In