Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKilpelä, Jonathan
dc.contributor.authorHiltunen, Jenna
dc.contributor.authorHähkiöniemi, Markus
dc.contributor.authorJokiranta, Kaisa
dc.contributor.authorLehesvuori, Sami
dc.contributor.authorNieminen, Pasi
dc.contributor.authorViiri, Jouni
dc.date.accessioned2023-05-16T05:29:20Z
dc.date.available2023-05-16T05:29:20Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.citationKilpelä, J., Hiltunen, J., Hähkiöniemi, M., Jokiranta, K., Lehesvuori, S., Nieminen, P., & Viiri, J. (2023). Analyzing science teachers’ support of dialogic argumentation using teacher roles of questioning and communicative approaches. <i>Dialogic Pedagogy</i>, <i>11</i>(3), A88-A118. <a href="https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2023.547" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2023.547</a>
dc.identifier.otherCONVID_183139117
dc.identifier.urihttps://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/86966
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this study is to investigate how teachers use different types of discourse to support dialogic argumentation. Dialogic argumentation is a collaborative process in which students construct arguments together and examine arguments presented by their peers. Science teachers can use argumentation as a vehicle to help students gain a working understanding of science content and the nature of science and its practices. Whole-class closing discussions from video-recorded lessons are analyzed to study the discourse used to support argumentation by two physics teachers in lower secondary schools. Analysis of discourse includes coding of communicative approach at the episode level and coding of teacher roles of questioning at the level of speaking turns. Student argumentation is also assessed on the basis of dialogicity and complexity of arguments. Findings characterize different ways of orchestrating argumentative discussions. Authoritative episodes were characterized by the presence of the dispenser role, with teachers retaining ownership over ideas and classroom activities to emphasize the correctness of a justification. Dialogic episodes of classroom interaction showed openness to student perspectives, but teachers’ use of questioning roles revealed different ways of orchestrating argumentative discussions. The moderator role granted ownership of ideas to students to either pursue a single student’s argument in more depth or to directly contrast opposing justifications. Less commonly used were the roles of coach and participant, which teachers used to elicit student justifications in more depth or support students in examining the arguments of their peers. Examination of discourse using multiple frameworks revealed differences in teachers’ values and the impact of the use of teacher questioning roles on student contributions to argumentative discussions.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherUniversity Library System, University of Pittsburgh
dc.relation.ispartofseriesDialogic Pedagogy
dc.rightsCC BY 4.0
dc.titleAnalyzing science teachers’ support of dialogic argumentation using teacher roles of questioning and communicative approaches
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi:jyu-202305163034
dc.contributor.laitosOpettajankoulutuslaitosfi
dc.contributor.laitosKoulutuksen tutkimuslaitosfi
dc.contributor.laitosMonikielisen akateemisen viestinnän keskusfi
dc.contributor.laitosDepartment of Teacher Educationen
dc.contributor.laitosFinnish Institute for Educational Researchen
dc.contributor.laitosCentre for Multilingual Academic Communicationen
dc.contributor.oppiaineMatematiikka ja luonnontieteetfi
dc.contributor.oppiaineMatematiikka ja luonnontieteeten
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
dc.description.reviewstatuspeerReviewed
dc.format.pagerangeA88-A118
dc.relation.issn2325-3290
dc.relation.numberinseries3
dc.relation.volume11
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
dc.rights.copyright© Authors 2023
dc.rights.accesslevelopenAccessfi
dc.relation.grantnumber286576
dc.subject.ysoopettajat
dc.subject.ysoopetus
dc.subject.ysodialogisuus
dc.subject.ysoargumentointi
dc.subject.ysoroolit
dc.subject.ysoluonnontieteet
dc.subject.ysooppilaat
dc.subject.ysokielellinen vuorovaikutus
dc.subject.ysoluokkatyöskentely
dc.format.contentfulltext
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p1117
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p2630
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p10824
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p12814
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p14418
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p6227
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p8131
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p7831
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p568
dc.rights.urlhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.relation.doi10.5195/dpj.2023.547
dc.relation.funderResearch Council of Finlanden
dc.relation.funderSuomen Akatemiafi
jyx.fundingprogramAcademy Project, AoFen
jyx.fundingprogramAkatemiahanke, SAfi
jyx.fundinginformationThis study was funded by the Academy of Finland (project number 286576) and the Finnish Cultural Foundation (fund number 00160353). The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
dc.type.okmA1


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

CC BY 4.0
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as CC BY 4.0