A DYNAMIC DISCOURSE APPROACH TO CLASSROOM RESEARCH

Review of
A DYNAMIC DISCOURSE APPROACH TO CLASSROOM RESEARCH
Written by
Anne Bannink, Jet van Dam
English Department, University of Amsterdam

Introduction
Today, there is a growing awareness of educational researchers and practitioners to link learning and thinking, educational success and failure to a discursive social situation which is constructed by a sense-making process. In the United States, for example, the teacher classroom practices are linked to the students academic performance. Many of educational reformers especially those associated with the standard movements viewed the importance of a rigorous curriculum, appropriate assessments, and standard skilful teachers are likely to contribute to the improvement of students academic performance (Wenglinsky, 2002).
Classroom problems are basically similar to the social problems as a whole. Since they have similarities in some ways, social contexts of the classroom must be taken into account. This is important as van Lier (1988) believes that without the social context it is difficult to see how classroom interaction can be understood and what cause-effect relationships, if they can ever be established, really mean.
In this project, I intend to review one of the classroom practices dealing with dynamic discourse approach applying to second language classroom for two reasons. Firstly, referring to articles released in educational studies, very often classroom practices are assumed to be key points of students’ successful learning. In fact, classroom practices are still far from being expected to that end. Secondly, I see that classroom practices as a part of social communities where the impact of government policies particularly educational policies can clearly be investigated. Since then, I want to look at how the researchers conceptualize the classroom features; how they relate each of the features of the classroom. In addition, how they address questions like how and why this phenomena occur.
In the first part of this essay I introduce an overview of the research being reviewed. This is aimed at giving a general picture of what the dynamic discourse approach is about and how it was applied in the classroom. My discussion begins with correlating epistemologically between the dynamic discourse approach applied in the classroom and the problem of demarcation. In this section I want to see how this research as a construct of knowledge in relation to the problem of demarcation between scientific, pseudo, and everyday knowledge, from the epistemological point of view.
The next discussion is about the relationship between research design and its methodological perspective. In this part I seek to see how this research as a micro-ethnographic study was methodologically built up and to what extent its methodology was scientifically accepted to contribute to scientific knowledge development. On the basis of the methodological discussion, I reveal some character flaws concerning with the research design. Finally, I deal with central arguments on the discussion reported by the researchers in this research.

An Overview of the Research
This study explored dynamic discourses which happened in the multi party talk classrooms. In its basic form, it was a theoretical reassessment of the discourse analytic tools applied in classroom setting. Three main perspectives where these multi party talks took place were discussed. The first perspective is viewed from the emerging discourse complexity; the interactional construction of competence. According to the researchers, this was about an instance of discourse which was almost prototypical exchange structure in classroom talks. Here, the analysis of the three-part Initiation-Response-Evaluation/Feedback (IRE/F) was presented in-depth. This was set up in a conventional teacher-fronted first English (EFL) lesson in the very first meeting of the academic year of secondary school group.
The second viewpoint is about the structural features of interactions where the interactional construction of competence was more emphasized. This is something to do with linguistic development constructed through the creation of the multimodal participation in joint activities and the exploitation of the structural features of evolving discourses as well as speaker/hearer roles.
It was mentioned that two episodes from Dutch as a second language classes in a school for refugee children were discussed. The first part was given in the morning where the teacher and the students were seated in a circle. The second episode was done later in the day where the teacher took a group of eight students to another room for a ’Total Physical Response (TPR)’. In this episode, individual learners were called upon to follow up formulaic instructions and perform actions that identified specific landmarks in the classroom.
The third viewpoint is about the emergent discourse complexity in relation to the classroom management. Here, two instructional units were used as a reflection data in a university teacher training course.

The Dynamic Discourse Approach and Problem of Demarcation
According to Macdonell (1986), discourse is social in a sense that the statement made, the words used and the meaning of the words used, depends on where and against what the statement is made. As we commonly know that there are many types of discourses. These can be identified by the institutions to which they relate and by the position from which they come and which they mark out for the speakers (Macdonell, 1986). Classrooms as a unit of social community have a particular set of discourses and it is dynamic as social discourses are. What is different between the classroom and the community in a broader perspective is the arena. The classroom discourse is limited to the teacher-students talk, while the latter is broader and has some different categories.
One of the influential studies of dynamic discourse especially spoken discourse was developed at the University of Birmingham (McCarthy, 2002). This study was initially concerned itself with the structure of discourse in the classroom. This dealt with the study of speech acts and at the same time tried to capture larger structures of the speech acts in the classroom.
Unlike the study of discourse structure developed by University of Birmingham, the dynamic discourse approach to classroom interaction especially to the multi-party talk one is more a process-oriented approach. In a sense that the researchers emphasize more on the flow or move of teacher’s talk rather than on the result of the talk which can be seen as socially and situationally developed in teacher- students’ talk moment-by-moment interactions.
In relation to demarcation problem, I present an illustrative example of refutation of theory which once was theorized by Adler and Freud. “that of a man who pushes a child into the water with the intention of drowning it; and that of a man who sacrifices his life in attempt to save the child”. Each of this according to Popper (1969: p.35) can be explained with equal ease in Freudian and Adlerian terms. To Freud, the first man suffered from repression while the second man had achieved sublimation. According to Adler, the first man suffered from inferiority (to prove that he dared to commit some crime). And so was the second man (whose need to prove himself that he dared to rescue the child (Popper, 1969).
From the example presented, it can be inferred that to arrive at a scientific statement, refutability is certainly required. In other words, since the statements addressed to the men presented above are two competing statements in a sense both of them could be equally at ease, explained Popper, it would be hardly accepted as scientific truth.
Likewise, how Victor expressed himself during the silent period; how his face looked when he realized that he could not answer his teacher’s question; and how the classroom situation during that particular moment basically yielded multilevel interpretations. Silence or confusion: pauses, short period of silence and period of confusion in which communication cannot be understood by the observers (Flanders, cited in Wragg &Kerry (1979). Instead, they provided an analysis in terms of the period of silence addressed to Victor by representing the absence of ‘switching code’ move that should be taken by the teacher though she had to break the rule (using English in the classroom).
Related to this problem, Popper (1969: p.37) views the importance of the criteria of scientific status of a theory such as falsifiability, refutability, and testability. According to him, the problem which he tried to solve by proposing the criterion of falsifiability was neither a problem of meaningfulness or significance, nor a problem of truth or acceptability. It was the problem of drawing a line between the statements or statements systems of the empirical sciences, and all other statements - whether they are of a religious or of a metaphysical character, or simply pseudo-scientifc (Popper, 1969: p.39).
In contrast, Kuhn (1962) view that falsifiability is inadequate to falsify whether a statement could be scientifically accepted after it is falsified through observations or a series of observations since the paradigm which is supposed to help compare was under one paradigm. Therefore, falsifiability is unhelpful to understand why and how science has developed as it has. To Kuhn, in the scientific practice, it is only possible for a theory after falsification is accepted as a new science if a credible alternative theory which can be used to compare the former is available.
In that point of view, Popper (1969: p.42) has strongly contrasted what Hume has previously stated that induction cannot be logically justified. Therefore there can be no valid logical arguments allowing us to establish that those instances of which we have had no experience, resemble those, of which we have had experience. Consequently, he stated that even after the observation of the frequent or constant conjunction of objects, we have no reasons to draw any inference concerning any object beyond those of which we have had experience.
Unlike Popper, Kuhn (1962) asserts that in principle, only three types of phenomena about which a new theory might be developed. The first are phenomena which have been well elaborated by existing paradigm, however, these phenomena rarely provide either motive or point of departure for theory construction. The dynamic discourse approach to the classroom research, for example, claimed by the researchers of this study as an approach which has been developed and undertaking prolonged time of debate, was assumed a workable approach to their study. However, the researchers did not provide sufficient evidences of the applicability of this approach in relation to their claims. In relation to the rational properties of scientific and common sense activities, Garfinkle (1967) claims that degree of rationality is determined by category and frequency of activity. Another point to consider is the error tolerability in a sense that degrees of goodness to fit between observation and theory. In addition, Dunne, et.al.(2005:12) state that research in social settings is often recursive in nature. That is to say that in understanding what is happening we need to take into consideration contexts wider than immediate social action in which we are participating.
The second class of phenomena are those whose nature is indicated by existing paradigms. However, its details can only be understood through further theory articulation. The third type of phenomena, that is, the recognised anomalies whose characteristic feature is their unreasonable refusal to be assimilated to existing paradigm. This usually happens when the articulation of theory fails to be done. On the basis of Kuhn’s concept of theory development, Blunden (1998) infers that in principle, a new theory does not have to conflict with any of its predecessors; a new phenomenon might emerge without reflecting destructively upon any part of past scientific practice; and again, the new theory might be simply a higher level theory than those known before.
Related to the idea of falsification, teacher-students’ talks which were built up on moment-by-moment interactions, it is basically a flaw to claim that the result of this analysis is scientifically accepted to contribute the body of professional knowledge for some reasons. Firstly, from epistemological perspective, it is the nature of researchers’ claims to know things about themselves and the world and to how justifies those claims (Dunne, et.al, 2005). Another reason is that the value the researchers put on their claims is contested. In any situation, multiple truths can be more likely constructed. Denzin and Lincoln (1998) ( cited in Dunne, et.al, 2005) states that the age of value-free inquiry for human discipline is over. In addition, Gray (2003) argues the analysis of text themselves no matter how sophisticated the framework , nor how broadly a text might be defined is of limited use in understanding the circulation of culture and the production of meaning. She further stated that the text itself can be subject to analysis and in relation to identity, race, class, gender and sexuality.

Research Design and its Methodological Perspectives
Before going through the research design description, let us look what research is about. Research a term loosely used in everyday speech to describe a multitude of activities, such as collecting mass of information, delving into esoteric theories, and producing wonderful new products (Walliman, 2001). In fact, there are some ways the term ‘research’ is wrongly used. According to Walliman (2001), the term ‘research’ is wrongly used as a mere gathering of facts or information; as a moving facts from one situation to another; as restricted theorizing activities, it is sometimes far removed from practical life; and finally; used as a word to get your product noticed. Therefore, Dunne, et.al (2005) remind us that as a social process, research has social and affective dimensions and consequences that we will explore alongside the practical, technical and methodological issues that are necessary to the enterprise. They further explain that what sort of entity we think the social world is; how we think we can have knowledge of it is prior and continuing questions in relation to the research process.
For example, if you are interested in the teacher-students interaction in the classroom, you can do it for a short period of time and could be either part-time or full-time basis. The topic, however, should be tightly defined. This means that it is necessary for the researcher to conceptualize where the interaction happens; what the interaction is about; how the interaction occurs; and why the interaction changes. How we understand these ideas has formative influence on how we conceive and conduct our research (Dunne, et.al, 2005). Lather (1997) in Dunne et.al (2005:12) argues that we live in a time of post-positivists enquiry where the researcher may have as a goal, prediction, understanding, emancipation, or deconstruction. All these categories embedded to the researchers are connected to epistemological and methodological perspectives.
As a micro-ethnographic study, this study essentially tried to reveal the actual discourses dynamically happened in the classroom. By this study, the researchers expected to gain a more precise understanding of the way contexts of interpretation in classroom multiparty situations may emerge, change and become more complex on a moment-by moment basis.
Bryman (2004: p. 293) suggests that it may be possible to carry out a form of micro-ethnography by focusing on a particular aspect of a topic. This is essentially related to how the research is conducted and how the data is collected. Over all, it is about methodology as much to do with reasoning as it does with data Anderson and Burns (1989: p. 45). They further suggested that there were three things needed to conduct a classroom research study. First, it is a question or a set of questions that defines the purpose of study. Second, a conceptual framework which guides the collection and interpretation of the evidences. Finally, a plan for collecting the evidence needed to address the question or questions being asked.
Willems and Raush (cited in Anderson and Burns, 1989) state that two basic questions are more general than issues of research technique. First, it is about how to obtain interpretable data; how to obtain data for which the ambiguity of evaluation is reduced to the lowest possible degree. Second, given a purpose or a set of purposes; a question or a set of questions, what kind of investigative exercises, operations, and strategies should the researcher embark upon to fulfil the purposes and answer the questions.
Related to the design of the research, where the point of departure was the individual’s cognitive processes inextricably interwoven with their experiences in the physical and social worlds, the idea of ethno-methodology applied was in line with what Malinowski’s core idea.
One of the first conditions of acceptable ethnographic work certainly is that it should deal with the totality of all social , cultural, and psychological aspects of the community, for they are so interwoven that not one can be understood without taking into consideration all the others.
(Malinowski, 1922)




Denscombe presented his arguments on ethnography in a more elaborative way.
“The points to consider to conduct an ethnographic study are the reasonable amount of time required; sharing rather than observing from a distance; routine and normal aspects of everyday life considered as research data; special attention to the people’s world; a holistic approach which stresses process, relationships, connections and interdependency; the final account acknowledged more than just a description - it is a construction”.
(Denscombe, 2003)
Similarly, Hammersley (1990); Creswell (2003) emphasize on an intact cultural group in a natural setting over a prolonged period of time by collecting primarily observational data. Meanwhile, LeCompte and Schensul (1999) assume that ethnography process is flexible and typically evolves contextually in response to the lived realities encountered in the field setting. What we can learn from ( Malinowski, 1922; Hammersley, 1990; Creswell, 1999 and 2003; and Denscombe, 2003) is that in the ethnographic study, a role of researcher basically needs a particularly longer involvement in the society where he or she conducts a study in order to come up with a highly reasonable amount of data collected from primary observation rather than taken from a distance.


Some Character Flaws of the Research in Relation to the Research Design.
As an ethnographic study, an unconvincing point was apparently seen in this study in relation to the in-depth of the analysis presented. The first point I am concerning with is that the central question of the research was not introduced. Instead, they started with topics of discussions without providing descriptions of addressing the topics rather than questions. Since the absence of the research question in this study, it will cause readers confused especially upon what the researchers aims to achieve in the study. Though readers may grab the ideas being focused but in some ways, in my opinion, many readers are not quite patient enough to read the research completely.
The following I introduce an illustration of how important the research question is. Finders (1996) ( cited in Creswell, 2003) writes: ‘How do early adolescent females read literature that falls outside the realm of fiction?’ Creswell further described in detailed that the central question begins with ‘HOW’; it uses an open-ended verb ‘read’; it also focuses on a single concept, the ‘literature’ or teen magazines; and it mentions the participants, ‘adolescent female’ in the study.
Here, what I can infer is how the researcher needs to craft a concise, a single question that is needed to be answered in the study. The central question in especially ethnographic study is crucial not only for the researchers themselves but also for readers. For the researchers, they will find it easily to answer the questions since the central question addressed has covered all aspects that the researcher is going to breakdown into several detailed questions. The readers will benefit from clear ideas to focus on reading.
The second point I need to consider is that since the researchers claimed to collect data from various instructional contexts and from different classes, then the data might be too wide to theoretically picture the in-depth information of the classroom interaction being studied. Whilst the aim of this ethnographic study is to provide an in-depth description of a particular community (classroom) rather than a number of different groups of community being studied. As Hammersley (1990) states that an ethnography emphasizes on producing theoretical; analytical; and thick description - whether of societies, small communities, organization, etc. He further suggests that the description must remain close to the concrete reality of particular events but at the same time reveal general features of human social life.
Though this research might result a more precise understanding of the way the contexts of interpretation evolved throughout the classroom multiparty situations, there should be some things remained unclear especially those related ,for example, to nonverbal interaction. Woolfolk and Galloway in Robinson (1994: p.19) claim that although a good deal of research has been done on various aspects of nonverbal communication, the research has had little or no impact on teaching. To them, this was possibly because it was so difficult for teachers, or anyone else, to become aware of their nonverbal communication. Similarly, Hammersley (1990) describes that the case of non-verbal elements of actions is more difficult. What is required, is accurate portrayal of patterns of physical movement.

The Central Argument on the Basis of Empirical Claims
Referring to the analysis presented by the researchers sequentially through the viewpoints of the research, it can be drawn several central arguments on the basis of empirical claims. First, the individual’s cognitive processes are inextricably interwoven with their experiences in the physical and the social worlds. This is the idea that knowledge and the knower of knowledge are not separable. Second, the challenge for researchers is to make the expert orchestration and synchronization of classroom participation and classroom events more analytically transparent. Brew (2003) (cited in Dunne, et.al., 2005) suggests that anyone coming into the research arena or wanting to understand more about the nature of research faces a number of puzzles. This is caused partly by the fact that the traditional disciplinary research has to give way to new forms of enquiry, requiring self-knowledge on the part of the researchers’. We should not consider confirmatory studies as conclusive evidence for corroborating a theory (Silva, 2007). Theoretically, research programs progress as long as its theories continue to make new prediction; empirically they progress as long as the predictions receive empirical support (Anderson and Burns, 1989).
This research is expected to promote how the classroom discourses could be well understood in order to improve teaching and learning in the classroom. In relation to this issue, Wragg & Kerry (1979: p. 5) propose two aspects in which interest has commonly centred to the classroom study. The first one is verbal behaviour within which most of the classroom activities deal with such as teacher’s explanation, instructions, and her questions. The second aspect is about non-verbal behaviour. Serbin in Delamont (1984: p.273) considers that in every classroom there is an unofficial curriculum, a part of the learning experienced that is determined by the teacher’s attitude and behaviour rather than a formal syllabus. For example, interpreting student’s silence during the interaction implied competing possibilities. According to the researchers, except for the insightful ethnography study in speaking, they found no tools to interpret silence. Neither pedagogy nor educational linguistics could provide the tools to construe the silence.
Robinson (1994) claims that in general, the business of teaching is understood as the activity which is almost exclusively verbal. However, she argued that nonverbal communication was integral to classroom climate or atmosphere which in turn formed the context in which the interaction between a teacher and students took place. Despite the claim that teaching and learning process was a verbal activity, it was in fact revealed that only about 35 percent of interaction happens verbally (Ross, 1989). Even less than that of previously revealed as Bennet (1990) estimated that 35 - 90 percent of the communication was channelled through nonverbal communication.
The authority of teacher was a key point in initiating negotiation once the student(s) found a question hard to respond. The negotiation of meaning is important especially in learning a language of either as a second language (L2) or a foreign language (FL). Here, the researchers argued that constructing feedback on the nature of learner’s problem was problematic if the teacher strictly observed the self-imposed rules of addressing the learners exclusively in English. Lier (1988: p.20) argues that given the nature of the L2 classroom as a formal setting is not an environment conducive to language development.

Conclusions
Despite of the methodological shortcomings, this current study represents an advance over previous works on classroom practices. Referring to overall the presentation of the research results, it can be concluded that the research revealed strong arguments in relation to how ethnographic study can be quite applicable to classroom research settings. Unfortunately, however, since this research tried to cover three different sources of data concerning with the dynamic discourse happened to three distinct classroom settings, the inquiry did not yield in-depth understanding of what sort of interactions really took place during the teaching and learning process.
Finally, this research is epistemologically refutable and therefore can be fallible no matter how much data is presented and how sophisticated way of analysing data they use. From Popper's principle of falsifiability, we learned that a good theory should "prohibit" the occurrence of specific phenomena. In this sense, we should always be worried when a theory claims to explain almost all types of behaviours.


References
Anderson,L.W. and Burns, R.B. (1989) Research in Classrooms: The Study of Teachers, Teaching, and Instruction. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.

Bennet, C.I. (1990) Comprehensive Multicultural Education: Theory and Practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Bryman, A. (2004) Social Research Methods. (2nd Ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Cresswell, J.W. (2003) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches. (2nd Ed.). London: Sage Publication, Inc.

Delanty, G. and Strydom, P. (2003) Philosophy of Social Sciences: The Classic and Contemporary Reading. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Denscombe, M. (2003) The Good Research Guide for Small-Scale Social Research Projects.(2nd Ed). Berkshire, England: Open University Press.

Dunne, M., Pryor, J., and Yates,P. (2005) Becoming a Researcher: a Research Companion for the Social Sciences. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Edwards, A.D. and Westgate, D.P.G. (1994) Investigating Classroom Talk. (2nd Ed.). London: The Falmer Press. (Social Research and Educational Studies Series: 13, p.40)

Garfinkle, H. (1967) Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Gray, A. (2003) Research Practice for Cultural Studies. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Hamilton, D. (1984) First day at School. (Ch. 10). In S. Delamont (ed.), Readings on Interaction in the Classroom: Contemporary Sociology of the School. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.

Hammersley, M. (1990) Classroom Ethnography: Empirical and Methodological Essays. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Hammersley, M. (1990) What’s Wrong with Ethnography? The Myth of Theoretical Description, Sociology, 24: (Pp. 597 - 615)

Kuhn, T.S. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (1st ed.) Chicago: University of Chicago.

LeCompte, M.D. and Schensul, J.J. (1999) Designing & Conducting Ethnographic Research. Walnut Creek, California: Alta Mira Press.

Macdonell, D. (1986) Theories of Discourse: An Introduction. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.

Malamah, A. and Thomas . (1987) Language Teaching : A Scheme for Teacher Education. In C.N. Candlin and H.G. Widdowson (eds.), Classroom Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Malinowski, B. (1922) Argonauts of the Western Pacific: an account of native enterprise and adventure in the archipelagos of Melanesian New Guinea London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

McCarthy, M. (2002) Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Robinson, H.A. (1994) The Ethnography of Empowerment: The Transformative Power of Classroom Interaction. London: The Falmer Press.

Ross, R. (1989) Small Groups in Organizational Settings. New York: Prentice Hall.

Serbin, L.A. (1984) Teacher, Peers and Play Preferences: An Environmental Approach to Sex Typing in the Preschool. (Ch. 12) In S. Delamont (ed.), Readings on Interaction in the Classroom: Contemporary Sociology of the School. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.

Simon, H.A. and Newell, A. (1956) Models: Their Uses and Limitations. In L.D. White (Ed.), The State of the Social Sciences (pp. 68 -83). Chicago: the University of Chicago Press.

Silva, L. (2007) Post-positivist Review of Technology Acceptance Model. Journal of the Association for Information Systems. Date: Sunday, April 1, 2007. Retrieved December 3, 2008, from http://www.allbusiness.com/technology/computing-information-technology-overview/10561457-1.html

Snow, R.E. (1973) Theory Construction for Research on Teaching. In R.M.W. Travers (Ed.). Second handbook of research on teaching (pp.77 - 112). Chicago: Rand McNally.

van Lier, L. (1988) The Classroom and the Language Learner: Applied Linguistics and Language Studies in C.N. Candlin (ed.). Essex, England: Longman Group UK Limited.

Walliman, N. (2001) Your Research Project: a step-by-step guide for the first-time researcher. London: Sage Publication.

Wenglinsky, H. (2002) How Schools Matter: The Link Between Teacher Classroom Practices and Student Academic Performance. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(12). Retrieved Januari 7, 2009 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n12/.

Wragg, E.C. and Kerry, T. (1979). Classroom Interaction Research. Rediguide 14, May, 1979. Nottingham University School of Education.

Written by:

Ruslin Tendri
DPhil in Educational Studies
University of Sussex
Brighton
United Kingdom