Premium
Variations in science teaching modalities and students' pedagogic subject positioning through the discourse register and language code
Author(s) -
Maeng Seungho,
Kim ChanJong
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
science education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.209
H-Index - 115
eISSN - 1098-237X
pISSN - 0036-8326
DOI - 10.1002/sce.20429
Subject(s) - modalities , register (sociolinguistics) , subject (documents) , mathematics education , modality (human–computer interaction) , pedagogy , discourse analysis , science education , code (set theory) , computer science , psychology , sociology , linguistics , set (abstract data type) , world wide web , social science , artificial intelligence , philosophy , programming language
This study investigated the modalities of science teaching practice and students' pedagogic subject positioning through the linguistic features of science classroom discourse and the discursive interaction. For this purpose, this study sought to develop a methodology for classroom discourse analysis, the TMARC (Triangular Model of Analyzing discourse Register and language Code). Applied to a middle school science classroom, the TMARC revealed that there were six types of teaching modalities during the classroom practices in spite of the teacher's predominant didactic teaching and that there existed the diverse variation types of the teaching modalities according to a temporal order. In addition, we found four types of pedagogic subject positioning through the application of TMARC. We also argued that the pedagogic subject positioning of a successful science learner was implemented in the discourse language codes of personal collaborative open discourse, positional collaborated open discourse, and personal collaborative controlled discourse. Each of these related to the science teaching modality in which student centeredness was emphasized. Thus, this study suggests that a science teacher's competency related to managing classroom discourse can control students' pedagogic subject position and, by extension, contribute to students' science learning. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 95: 431–457, 2011