1913

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

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

PDF

___

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.
Balaman, U. & Sert, O. (2017b). Development of L2 interactional resources for online collaborative task accomplishment. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(7), 601-630.
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.
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.
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.
Cekaite, A. (2009). Collaborative corrections with spelling control: Digital resources and peer assistance. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 319-341.
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.
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.
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.
Drew, P. (1981). Adults’ corrections of children’s mistakes: A response to Wells and Montgomery. In P. French & M. MacLure (Eds.), Adult-child conversations: Studies in structure and process (pp. 244–267). London, England: Croom Helm.
Faber, J., & Visscher, A. (2016). De effecten van Snappet: effecten van een adaptief onderwijsplatform op leerresultaten en motivatie van leerlingen. Enschede: Universiteit Twente.
Gardner, R. (2007). The Right connections: Acknowledging epistemic progression in talk. Language in Society, 36(3), 319-341.
Gardner, R., & Levy, M. (2010). The coordination of talk and action in the collaborative construction of a multimodal text. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(8), 2189-2203.
Gašević, D., Buckingham-Shum, S., Long, P., Dawson, S. & Haythornthwaite, C. (2015). Society for learning analytics research. Retrieved 08/31, 2015, from http://solaresearch.org/
Goodwin, C. (1979). The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 97–121). New York, NY: Irvington Publishers.
Greatbatch, D. (2006). Prescriptions and prescribing: coordinating talk- and text-based activities. In J. Heritage, & D.
W. Maynard (Eds.), Communication in medical care: Interaction between primary care physicians and patients (pp. 313–339). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Greatbatch, D., Luff, P., Heath, C., & Campion, P. (1993). Interpersonal communication and human-computer interaction: An examination of the use of computers in medical consultations. Interacting with Computers, 5, 193–216.
Greatbatch, D., Heath, C., Campion, P., & Luff, P. (1995). How do desktop computers affect the doctor-patient interaction? Family Practice, 12, 32–36.
Greatbatch, D., Heath, C., Luff, P., & Campion, P. (1995). Conversation analysis: Human-computer interaction and the general practice consultation. In A. Monk, & N. Gilbert (Eds.), Perspectives on HCI: Diverse approaches (pp. 199–222). New York: Academic Press.
Greiffenhagen, C., & Watson, R. (2009). Visual repairables: Analyzing the work of repair in human-computer interaction. Visual Communication, 8(1), 65–90.
Heritage, J. (2010). Questioning in medicine. In A. F. Freed & S. Ehrlich (Eds.), “Why do you ask?”: The function of questions in institutional discourse (pp. 42–68). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Heritage, J. (2011). Territories of knowledge, territories of experience: Empathic moments in interaction. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation (pp. 159–183). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Heritage, J. (2012a). The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45, 30-52.
Heritage, J. (2012b). Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45, 1–29.
Heritage, J. (2013). Epistemics in conversation. In: Sidnell, J., Stivers, T. (Eds.), The Handbook of Conversation Analysis (pp. 370-394). Blackwell, West Sussex,.
Heritage, J. & Maynard, D. (2006). Introduction: Analyzing primary care encounters. In J. Heritage & D. Maynard (Eds.), Communication in Medical Care: Interactions between Primary Care Physicians and Patients. (pp. 1-21). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heritage, J., & Raymond, G. (2005). The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in assessment sequences. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(1), 15–38.
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, UK: Cambridge University Press..
Heritage, J. & Robinson, J. (2006). Accounting for the visit: giving reasons for seeking medical care. In J. Heritage & D. Maynard (Eds), Communication in Medical Care: Interactions between Primary Care Physicians and Patients (pp. 48-85).. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hjulstad, J. (2016). Practices of organizing built space in videoconference-mediated interactions. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49(4), 325-341.
Houen, S., Danby, S., Farrell, A., & Thorpe, K. (2017). Web Searching as a Context to Build on Young Children’s Displayed Knowledge. In Bateman, A., Church, A. (Eds.), Children's Knowledge-in-Interaction (, pp. 57-72). Springer, Singapore.
Jefferson, G. (1984). Transcript notation. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis. (pp. ix-xvi). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Keating, E., & Sunakawa, C. (2010). Participation cues: Coordinating activity and collaboration in complex online gaming worlds. Language in Society, 39(3), 331-356.
Koole, T. (2010). Displays of epistemic access. Student responses to teacher explanations. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(2), 183–209.
Koole, T. (2012a). The epistemics of student problems: Explaining mathematics in a multi-lingual class. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(13), 1902-1916.
Koole, T. (2012b). Teacher Evaluations: Assessing ‘Knowing’, ‘Understanding’, and ‘Doing’. In G. Rasmussen, C.E. Brouwer & D. Day (Eds.), Evaluating Cognitive Competences in Interaction, (pp. 43–66). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Levy, M., & Gardner, R. (2012). Liminality in multitasking: Where talk and task collide in computer collaborations. Language in Society, 41(5), 557-587.
Luff, P., Heath, C., Yamashita, N., Kuzuoka, H., & Jirotka, M. (2016). Embedded reference: translocating gestures in video-mediated interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49(4), 342-361.
Macbeth, D. (2011). Understanding understanding as an instructional matter. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(2), 438-451.
Mehan, H. (1979). "What time is it, Denise?": Asking known information questions in classroom discourse. Theory into Practice, 18(4), 285-294.
Merke, S. (2016). Establishing the explainable in Finnish-as-a-foreign-language classroom interaction: Studentinitiated explanation sequences. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 9, 1-15.
Musk, N. (2016). Correcting spellings in second language learners’ computer-assisted collaborative writing. Classroom Discourse, 7(1), 36-57.
Nevile, M., Haddington, P., Heinemann, T., & Rauniomaa, M. (Eds.). (2014). Interacting with objects: Language, materiality, and social activity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Norén, N., Svensson, E., & Telford, J. (2013). Participants’ dynamic orientation to folder navigation when using a VOCA with a touch screen in talk-in-interaction. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29(1), 20-36.
Park, I. (2012). Seeking advice: Epistemic asymmetry and learner autonomy in writing conferences. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(14), 2004-2021.
Peräkylä, A. (1998). Authority and accountability: The delivery of diagnosis in primary health care. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61(4), 301–320.
Piirainen–Marsh, A., & Tainio, L. (2009). Collaborative game-play as a site for participation and situated learning of a Second Language. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 53(2), 167-183.
Piirainen–Marsh, A., & Tainio, L. (2014). Asymmetries of knowledge and epistemic change in social gaming interaction. The Modern Language Journal, 98(4), 1022-1038.
Pomerantz, A. M. (1980). Telling my side: “Limited access” as a “fishing” device. Sociological Inquiry, 50, 186–198.
Raclaw, J., Robles, J. S., & DiDomenico, S. M. (2016). Providing epistemic support for assessments through mobile supported sharing activities. Research on Language and Social Interaction 49(4): 362-379..
Raymond, G. (2000). The voice of authority: The local accomplishment of authoritative discourse in live news broadcasts. Discourse Studies, 2, 354–379.
Raymond, G. & Heritage, J. (2006). The Epistemics of Social Relationships: Owning Grandchildren. Language in Society, 35(5), 677-705.
Robinson, J. D. (1998). Getting down to business: Talk, gaze, and body orientation during openings of doctor - patient consultations. Human Communication Research, 25(1), 97-123.
Robinson, J. D. (2006). Soliciting patients’ presenting concerns. In J. Heritage & D.W. Maynard (Eds.), Communication in medical care: Interaction between primary care physicians and patients (pp. 22-47 ). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, J. & Heritage, J. (2006). Physicians' opening questions and patients' satisfaction. Patient Education and Counseling, 60, 279-285.
Roth, A. (2002). Social epistemology in broadcast news interviews. Language in Society, 31, 355–81.
Rusk, F., Pörn, M., & Sahlström, F. (2016). Whose question? Whose knowledge? Morality in the negotiation and management of L2 knowledge in a communicative L2 program. In A. Surian (Ed.), Open spaces for interactions and learning diversities (pp. 151–166). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
Sacks H. (1972a). An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for doing sociology. In D. N. Sudnow (Ed.) Studies in Social Interaction (pp. 31–74). New York: The Free Press.
Sacks H. (1972b). On the analyzability of stories by children. In J. J. Gumperz and D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication (pp. 325–345). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Sacks H. (1984). On doing ‘being ordinary.’ In J. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds.) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 413–429). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sacks H. (1992) [1967]. Lectures on conversation. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Schegloff E. A. (2007). A tutorial on membership categorization. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 462–482.
Sert, O. (2013). ‘Epistemic status check’ as an interactional phenomenon in instructed learning settings. Journal of Pragmatics, 45(1), 13-28.
Sert, O., & Walsh, S. (2013). The interactional management of claims of insufficient knowledge in English language classrooms. Language and Education, 27(6), 542-565.
Sinclair, J.M., & Coulthard, R.M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Solem, M. S. (2016). Negotiating knowledge claims: Students’ assertions in classroom interactions. Discourse Studies, 18(6), 737-757.
Spink, A., Danby, S., Mallan, K., & Butler, C. (2010). Exploring young children's web searching and technoliteracy. Journal of Documentation, 66(2), 191-206.
Stivers, T., Mondada, L., & Steensig, J. (2011). Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge (pp. 3–24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., & Liu, T. C. (2016). The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students' learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education, 94, 252- 275.
Ten Have, P. (2007). Doing conversation analysis. A practical guide. London: Sage Publications Ltd. van Charldorp, T. C. (2011). The interactional construction of the police record via the coordination of talking and typing in police interrogations. Crossroads of language, interaction and culture, 8(1), 61-92.
van Charldorp, T. C. (2013). The intertwining of talk and technology: how talk and typing are combined in the various phases of the police interrogation. Discourse and Communication, 7(2), 221-240.
Whalen, M. R., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1990). Describing trouble: Practical epistemology in citizen calls to the police. Language in society, 19(4), 465-492.
Wu, W. H., Wu, Y. C. J., Chen, C. Y., Kao, H. Y., Lin, C. H., & Huang, S. H. (2012). Review of trends from mobile learning studies: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 59(2), 817-827.
Zemel, A., & Koschmann, T. (2013). Recalibrating reference within a dual-space interaction environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8(1), 65-87.