classroom research realities
Classroom research realities | Jake Kimball | April 24th, 2002
Since it's so quiet, I think I'd like to write about research. I've been reading up on research methods and the one thing I've noticed is that my transcriptions of classroom talk doesn't match the quality that I'm reading in research books (not every case but a majority).
Basically, whenever I read these transcriptions of someone else's work their Ss seem so advanced because they complete tasks and questionnaires easily, and just generally cooperate nicely. The research done by 'experts' seems to be well... perfect. Are they loading their classes with advanced learners? Those classes don't seem like run of the mill classes to me. Do they select Ss for 'research classes?'
How about you? Has anyone noticed this?
Jake
Re: Classroom research realities | Raymond Sheehan | April 24th, 2002
I haven't particularly noticed this bias. I would have thought that the best research opportunities would come from observing learners who are far from perfect in teaching contexts that are far from perfect- and finding solutions (as in the SPRE format). What is the point of studying perfection, in the very unlikely event that it existed in the language classroom? No, I haven't come across any paragons of pedagogical virtue that we should all begin to emulate.
I also don't warm to the idea of research done by 'experts.' It's about time that teachers as researchers asserted their own expertise, based on insiders' knowledge, and became the purveyors rather than recipients of research.
Raymond
UAE
Example | Jake Kimball | April 24th, 2002
As an example, several methods books I've been looking at all provide examples of qualitative and quantitative research. When I see their transcriptions of Ss and T talk, my first thought is 'hey, my Ss sure don't talk like that.' A Nunan book I'm finishing uses example studies, several of which include Ss who seem to use nearly perfect utterances when they speak; other books concerning diary studies include writings that demonstrate quite literate Ss, the likes of which I won't see in my class (until pigs fly, that is). Just kidding there... I do have a few good writers and very fluent Ss but that's not the norm and those aren't the classes I need to research.
I teach YLs and teens and I do feel quite lucky to have such great bunch of kids who rarely give me headache. I don't have chaotic classrooms but I would like to see transcriptions of a class gone wrong which would be a more accurate depiction of most of our circumstances. That would be more helpful.
Jake
Re: Classroom research realities | Steve Mann | April 25th, 2002
Thanks to Jake for raising an interesting issue. I think it raises some fundamental issues. This is a personal response.
I must admit to the temptation of including juicy extracts of interaction in articles. I guess there must be a temptation to choose extracts which represent your students as having benefited from your teaching!
I've certainly come across plenty of assignments that deal with student reticence to speak which do include transcripts of mostly the teacher talking and only half-formed monosyllabic responses from the students themselves. Obviously if you focus is on 'wait-time' or IRF patterns, communicative strategies (or lack of) then this need not be a problem. However, if your focus is on getting students to provide anecdotes then it doesn't look too good if the teacher is the only one talking. Progress, however, will not be best described by choosing the one student who went to America for a year as your 'piece of data' to show the 'improvement' after a week's anecdote practice.
What makes a good transcript? Really, only that it provides as accurate as possible representation for the reader of a speech event. The rest is an editorial decision. We all have journalistic tendencies that need to be held in check.
Neither does this issue only apply to classroom data. It can apply just as much to IIC work in L1. What sorts of exchanges seem to representative is a better starting point than which exchanges seem to provide the least disfluencies or which exchanges make the most entertaining pieces of data for the reader.
Thanks anyway for raising an interesting issue Jake.
Re: Example | Raymond Sheehan | April 26th, 2002
Hi, Jake,
I'm still wondering about the point you raised! Do you think the magnificent dialogues in methodology books are there
a) because the authors preferred to focus on 'advanced' learners for display purposes? or
b) because the messy transcripts of real classroom interaction become edited and re-edited for publication?
If b) then it is a little worrying. However, there might be a good area here for a TDA investigation: what effect does an individual's variation have on transcription of classroom reality? It might be an interesting task to have three people or more record the same classroom event and see what deviations there are in their subsequent transcription.
Without wishing to compare language learners to suspects (!) or teachers to cops with their own agendas (!!), your point did bring to mind Coulthard's article on cleaned up transcription: "The official version: audience manipulation in police records of interviews with suspects." (Caldas-Coulthard and Coulthard, 1996).
The only Nunan book I have on my desk at the moment is The Learner-Centred Curriculum (1988/1991), and you will find interesting examples of teachers struggling with inarticulate learners! Pages 84-85 show two pieces of interaction to illustrate the difference between referential questions and display questions and he shows the kind of language my own learners frequently come up with as they struggle to articulate something beyond their lexical and structural range: "My mother is by bicycle. By bicycle, yes, many, many water." Page 140, similarly, shows a teacher (too?) firmly in control of the interaction in a class of lower level.
If you like, I can send you a transcript of my FND assignment (and Julian's and Jane's comments) that was with an elementary group.
Does anybody else have any refs. to transcripts of classroom interaction that either have the ring of authenticity or seem overly polished?
Raymond
UAE
Re: Example | Jerry Talandis Jr. | April 26th, 2002
For my recently completed MET assignment, I relied heavily on the Hancock article (from the FND articles binder). That article used a lot of transcribed data from actual conversations, and by no means were they "scrubbed clean." Sorry, Jake. Your question is a "non-issue" with me! In fact, in my limited career as an MSc participant, I've yet to come across any transcribed data that looked "too perfect." Oh well.
Jerry
Re: Classroom research realities | James Hobbs | April 26th, 2002
Jerry,
I also got a lot out of the Hancock article for MET, but as the theme of that article was code-switching I suppose that transcripts of accurate, fluent exchanges were exactly what he wasn't looking for. Hancock was specifically looking for examples peppered with L1.
I don't have my files with me right now, so I'm afraid I can't supply any names or titles, but like Jake I often get the feeling that the language in many transcripts in books and articles is just so fluent and accurate that you have to wonder why the students are taking an English class in the first place.
Raymond, I love the idea of investigating different people transcribing the same recording, and that gave me the idea of doing something similar in the area of proofreading, by comparing which "errors" different people correct. Thanks.
Back to the transcription issue, though, with the growth of the Internet I wonder how long it will be before people start publishing stuff online with the interaction data included as sound clips so that you can actually 'listen to' the transcripts to check them. That seems to be one area in which the Internet would have an unquestionable advantage over paper journals.
James
Japan
with 
and 
