Image courtesy of Flickr. Link Here.
As part of Goswami’s (2015, p24-25) conclusion to her report ‘Children’s Cognitive Development and Learning’ she highlights how “learning in young children is socially mediated” plus how the use of “language is crucial for development”. Whilst on placement, I have witnessed how these two areas are intrinsically linked and how the teachers’ pedagogy in relation to them positively impacted upon the pupil’s learning.
Language acquisition enables children to begin to understand the world around them and explore the meaning behind their experiences and therefore their perception of both human behaviour and the physical world (Goswami, 2015). From birth it is our social influences that construct our language development in the form of our families. When in the classroom environment it is then the responsibility of the teacher to create opportunities for this to develop further. Vygotsky’s cognition theory supports collaborative learning as a tool which enables children to increase their capacity for learning and development (Pollard, 2014). Furthermore, the national curriculum (DfE, 2014) dictates that pupils are expected to develop their language skills to express reasoned and critical thought verbally, which in turn supports their writing skills.
The ability to communicate through reasoned discussion forms the basis of our democratic society. Therefore the use of ‘talk’ in the classroom should be engineered whereby it facilitates exploration and debate of pupils’ own ideas whilst enhancing their learning (Husbands and Pearce, 2012; Alexander, 2010). However, to be effective this needs to be enacted alongside support from the adults within the teaching environment. This provides guidance through modelling of language and structure whilst using scaffolding techniques to build upon and address knowledge acquisition and ensure progressive learning takes place (Cekaite et al, 2014). This concept is known as dialogic teaching and is recommended by government funded research as a pedagogy for effective teaching (Husbands and Pearce, 2012).
Image courtesy of Flickr. Link here.
I would argue that my teacher’s pedagogical stance reflected the ideologies of dialogic teaching. Peer talk was a part of every lesson and the children were encouraged to discuss their ideas in response to the stimulus given. Children would then be selected or encouraged to offer their ideas to the class. The teacher would use open questioning to help the children deepen their thinking and develop their meta-cognition. Then the children were guided through the process of considering each idea in terms of the task at the hand and debating which idea was most suitable or how it could be adapted. This was particularly effective during group write sessions.
By modelling this process with the children it developed their use of language, vocabulary and also how to construct reasoned, thoughtful arguments and answers. It also gave them a structure to begin to consider when they were then sent to their tables to complete the task. I witnessed a range in grouped, paired or individual work, but the children were always encouraged to support each other and discuss their ideas with others on their table. This developed their independence and empowered them to take control over their own learning. It also allowed the adults to be able to move freely around the groups and offer support and address misconceptions, discussing with groups or individuals their ideas. This provided further opportunities to scaffold and model and also adapt the explanation to the specific needs of the children. I noticed that the children were confident when asking for help from each other or an adult and willing to engage in discussion with each other.
Image courtesy of Flickr. Link here.
When leading the class I aimed to embed this process in my teaching however Pollard (2014, p 10) states, “It is not only the values we go into teaching with that matter, but how we feel able to put these into practice”. To embed dialogic teaching practices requires the teacher to have a comprehensive understanding of the principles and research behind it and takes considered planning and development over time to become truly effective (Husbands and Pearce, 2012). I have seen it delivered consistently and with positive effect in my teacher’s practice and will endeavour to continue to develop my ability to do so as I progress as a trainee teacher.
References:
Alexander, R., 2010. Speaking but not listening? Accountable talk in an unaccountable context. Literacy, 44(3) pp.103-111 [online] Available at: http://www.robinalexander.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/UKLA-http-authorservices.wiley_.com-bauthor-onlineLibraryTPS.asp_DOI10.1111-j.1741-4369.2010.00562.xArticleID7470671.pdf [Accessed 09/01/2017]
Cekaite, A., Blum-Kulka, S., Grøver, V., Teubal, E., 2014. Children’s peer talk and learning: uniting discursive, social, and cultural facets of peer interactions. In: A. Cekaite, S. Blum-Kulka, V. Grøver, E. Teubal, ed. 2014. Children’s Peer Talk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
DfE, 2014. Statutory Guidelines, National Curriculum in England: framework for key stages 1 to 4. London: Department for Education. [pdf] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-framework-for-key-stages-1-to-4/the-national-curriculum-in-england-framework-for-key-stages-1-to-4 [Accessed 09/01/2017]
Goswami, U. 2015. Children’s Cognitive Development and Learning; Report for the Cambridge Primary Review Trust. [online] Available at: http://cprtrust.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/COMPLETE-REPORT-Goswami-Childrens-Cognitive-Development-and-Learning.pdf [Accessed 09/01/2017]
Husbands, C., Pearce, J. 2012. What makes great pedagogy? Nine claims from research. London: National College for School Leadership. [pdf] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/329746/what-makes-great-pedagogy-nine-claims-from-research.pdf [Accessed 09/01/17]
Pollard, A. 2014. Reflective Teaching in Schools. 4th ed. London: Bloomsbury Academic