Insights into the interaction and discourse in the senior phase natural sciences classroom

Abstract

This paper investigated interaction and discourse during teacher classroom practices in the Senior Phase Natural Sciences in some rural schools positioned in the Vhembe District of the Limpopo Province, South Africa. The research method employed was a qualitative interpretative multiple case study design. Two schools were selected, and one Natural Science teacher from each school participated in this study. Classroom observations and interviews were used to collect data from Senior phase Natural Sciences teachers. Natural sciences teachers were interviewed in their schools and observed during classroom practice. The findings of the study show that the type of discourse observed from Natural Sciences teachers was authoritative discourse and the pattern of discourse employed was Initiation Response Evaluation. Teacher questioning was used to develop the lesson and evaluate learner understanding. Teachers used an interactive-authoritative communicative approach during their lesson presentations. The consequences of the approaches the teachers use limit the opportunities for learners to interact amongst themselves and the subject content. It is recommended that besides focusing on subject matter knowledge during continuous development programs, there is a need to focus on interactions and discourse. Furthermore, there is a need to conduct further studies on a large scale so that a suitable intervention program can be designed for in-service teachers.

Keywords: {'name': 'classroom practice'}, {'name': 'natural sciences'}, {'name': 'senior phase'}, {'name': 'discourse'}

Authors & affiliations

Awelani V Mudau
Affiliation not supplied

Ndivhuwo Netshivhumbe
Affiliation not supplied

Deposited references

Supplied references, not a list of publications citing this article.

Alexander, R. (2008). Towards Dialogic Teaching: rethinking classroom talk (4th ed). Cambridge: Dialogos.

DOI: 10.1007/s10763-020-10061-1

DOI: 10.1177/1086296X16632451

DOI: 10.1080/09500690600621100

DOI: 10.1007/s10763-014-9557-6

Department of Basic Education. (2011c). Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement Grade 7-9 Natural Sciences. Pretoria: Government Printers.

Department of Education. (2002c). Revised National Curriculum Statement Grades R – 9 (Schools), Natural Sciences. Pretoria: Government Printer.

DOI: 10.17478/JEGYS.2018.84

Foy, C. (2013) . Benefits and strategies for classroom discourse. University of Georgia.

Government of the Republic of South Africa, Department of Science and Technology. (2002). South Africa’s National Research and Development Strategy. Pretoria, South Africa: Department of Science and Technology.

Green, J.L. & Rex, L.A. (2018). Classroom discourse and interaction: Reading across the traditions. Retrieved October 25, 2018 from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228051635.

DOI: 10.1002/tea.21385

DOI: 10.1002/9781118531242

DOI: 10.1119/1.2209243

DOI: 10.4159/harvard.9780674420106

DOI: 10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.03.001

DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.2012.02071.x

Mortimer, E.F. & Scott, P.H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Mudau, A.V. (2013). Evaluating the teaching of projectile motion in Grade 12 classrooms. Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria.

DOI: 10.5901/jesr.2013.v4n3p113

DOI: 10.17478/jegys.599902

Nkanyani, T.E. (2018). Teaching difficulties of natural sciences educators in the planet, earth and beyond strand in the Sekgosese East Circuit of Limpopo. Master of Education thesis. University of South Africa.

DOI: 10.17478/jegys.647070

Rezaie, M & Lashkarian, A. (2015). Reviewing Different Aspects of Classroom Discourse. International Journal of English and Education. ISSN: 2278-4012, 4(4)

DOI: 10.1177/002248718603700110

DOI: 10.17478/jegys.624643

Scott, P. & Ametller, J. (2007). Teaching science in a meaningful way: striking a balance between ' opening up ' and ' closing down ' classroom talk. School Science Review, 88(324):77-83.

DOI: 10.1002/sce.21275

DOI: 10.1007/s10763-015-9617-6