Challenging and Objecting: Functions of Third Position Turns in Student-Initiated Question Sequences

Research on the classical IRE-sequences in the classroom context has highlighted teachers’ use of questions as teaching tools and how questioning processes serve as efficient learning tools. One especially important turn in questioning processes is the third position of the sequence which incorporates the potential to enhance learning and provide resources for students. This article examines sequences similar to the IRE-sequence – student-initiated question sequences – focusing on the third position of these sequences. In the default question sequence, the third position is used to signal an acceptance of the prior response. The analysis examines turns that signal disalignment with the teacher and may therefore communicate a challenge or an objection to the teacher. The aim is to demonstrate how the different formats of third positions are used to express fine-grained challenges concerning the granularity of knowledge and epistemic responsibilities. Thus, non-aligning dialogue particles, follow-up questions or postexpansions in third position can convey a challenging quality. The research method adopted is ethnomethodological conversation analysis. A detailed sequential analysis demonstrates that troubles encountered in mutual understanding may be related to issues of epistemicity and moral order. A central result is that question sequences provide the participants with learning tools that connect to the organisation of emotional and moral issues

PDF

___

Bergmann, J. & Luckmann, T. (Ed.) (1999). Die kommunikative Konstruktion von Moral. Mannheim: Verlag für Gesprächsforschung.
Evnitskaya, N. & Berger, E. (2017). Learners’ multimodal misplays of willingness to participate in classroom interaction in the L2 and CLIL contexts. Classroom Discourse, 8(1), 71-94.
Heinonen, P. (2017). Evaluointi opettajan vuorovaikutustoimintana. Osallistujuuden ulottuvuudet luokkahuoneessa [Evaluation as a teacher's interactional practice: dimensions of classroom participation]. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
Heritage, J. (2012). Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(1), 1-29.
Heritage, J. & Raymond, G. (2012). Navigating epistemic landscapes: acquiescence, agency and resistance in responses to polar questions, In J.P. De Ruiter (Ed.) Questions. Formal, functional and interactional perspectives (pp. 179-192). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jacknick, C. (2011). "But this is writing": Post-expansion in student-initiated sequences. Novitas Royal, Research on Youth and Language, 5(1), 39-54.
Jakonen, T. (2014). Knowing matters. How students address lack of knowledge in bilingual classroom. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän yliopisto.
Jakonen, T. & Morton, T. (2015). Epistemic search sequences in peer interaction in a content-based language classroom. Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 73-94.
Kääntä, L. (2014). From noticing to initiating correction: Students' epistemic displays in instructional interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 86-105.
Kasper, G. & Wagner, J. (2011). A conversation-analytic approach to second language acquisition, In D. Atkinson (Ed.) Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 117-142). New York: Routledge.
Keppler, A. (1989). Schritt für Schritt. Das Verfahren alltäglicher Belehrungen. Soziale Welt, 40, 538-556.
Koole, T., 2010. Displays of epistemic access: Student responses to teacher explanations. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(2), 183-209.
Lee, Y.-A. (2006). Respecifying display questions: Interactional resources for language teaching. TESOL Quartely 40(4), 691-713.
Lee, Y.-A. (2008). Yes‒No questions in the third-turn position: Pedagogical discourse processes. Discourse Processes, 45, 237-262.
Lehtimaja, I. (2012). Puheen suuntia luokkahuoneessa. Oppilaat osallistujina yläkoulun suomi toisena kielenä - tunnilla [Directions of talk in the classroom. Pupils as participants of Finnish-as-L2 lessons.] University of Helsinki, Department for Finnish, Scandinavian and Finno-Ugrian Studies, Helsinki.
Leipzig Glossing Rules. Max Planck Institute Leipzig. https://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/resources/glossing-rules.php.
Lerner, G.H. (2004). Collaborative turn sequences, In G.H. Lerner (Ed.) Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 225-256). Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
Majlesi, A.R. & Broth, M. (2012). Emergent learnables in second language interaction. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1, 193-207.
Margutti, P., (2006). "Are you human beings?" Order and knowledge construction through questioning in primary classroom interaction. Linguistics and Education, 17, 313-346.
Markee, N. (1995). Teachers’ answers to students’ questions: Problematizing the issue of making meaning. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6, 63-92.
Markee, N. & Kasper, G. (2004). Classroom talks: An introduction. The Modern Language Journal, 88(4), 491-500.
Merke, S. (2016a). Opiskelijoiden aloittamat kysymyssekvenssit suomi vieraana kielenä -oppitunnin voimavarana [Student-initiated question sequences as learning potential in Finnish-as-a-foreign language classes.] Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
Merke, S. (2016b). Establishing the explainable in Finnish-as-a-foreign language classroom interaction: Studentinitiated explaining sequences. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 9, 1-15.
Merke, S. (2017). Tackling and establishing norms in classroom interaction: Student requests for clarification, In R. Laury, M. Etelämäki, E. Couper-Kuhlen (Ed.) Linking clauses and actions in social interaction (pp. 103-130). Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
Macbeth, D. (2011). Understanding understanding as an instructional matter. Journal of Pragmatics 43, 438-451.
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mondada, L. (2011). The management of knowledge discrepancies and of epistemic changes in institutional interactions, In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, J. Steensig (Ed.), The morality of knowledge (pp. 27-57). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2013). Social-interactional approaches to SLA: A state of art and some future perspectives. LIA, Language Interaction Acquisition, 4(2), 134-160.
Pomerantz, A. (1986). Extreme case formulations. A way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies 9, 219-229.
Sacks, H. (1992). On questions, In G. Jefferson (Ed.) Lectures in conversation, Volume 1. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696-735.
Sahlström, F. (2009). Conversation analysis as a way of studying learning - An introduction to a special issue of SJER. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 53(2), 103-111.
Schegloff, E. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in interaction. American Journal of Sociology, 95(5), 1295-1345.
Schegloff, E. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analytic perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Sert, O. (2015). Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh: University Press.
Sinclair, J.M. & Coulthard, R.M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
Stivers, T., Mondada, L. & Steensig, J. (2011). Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction, In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, J. Steensig (Ed.), The morality of knowledge (pp. 3-24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Waring, H. Z. (2008). Using explicit positive assessments (EPA) in the language classroom: IRF, feedback, and learning opportunities. The Modern Language Journal, 92(4), 577-594.
Waring, H. Z. (2011). Learner initiatives and learning opportunities in the language classroom. Classroom Discourse, 2(2), 201-218.
Waring, H. Z. (2012). Yes‒No questions that convey a critical stance in the language classroom. Language and Education, 26(5), 451-469.
Waring, H. Z. (2013). Managing competing voices in the second language classroom. Discourse Processes, 50, 316- 338.
Zemel, A. & Koschmann, T. (2011). Pursuing a question: Reinitiating IRE sequences as a method for instruction. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(2), 475-488.