Classroom and Discourse democracy making meanings together by susan jean mayer
Foreword:
In a democratic society, we might expect that one of the aims of schooling is to provide all ss with the chance to acquire intellectual authority. As mayer points out, intellectual authority concerns not just"what and how a person knows",but also that person's willingness and ability to understand the sometimes divergent views of other. This gives rise, however, to the interviewable question: how do we accomplish this aim?
a threat to the teacher's sense of control ant to ss' positioning within the social hierarchy of the classroom.
so while many people share the intuition that the thinking of an individual student can be deepen or made more robust by engaging in conversational interaction with others, it is not easy to reach consensus, or even a general framework, for how this should be done in actual classroom.
Some hold that the only goal worth striving for is student-led discussion, where the teacher principally stands to the side in appreciation. Others feel strongly that this cannot work: in order to convey the intellectual content in a way that preserves its integrity and prepares ss of further study, the teacher must invariably lead.
Based on close analyses of classrooms where discussions are long fruitful, Mayer calmly and insightfully examines the affordances and constraints of teacher-led, student-led and co-led classroom discussions. These three types are not facile reductions of the gradient interactional forms we find in actual classroom.
The core of the book consists of analyses of these three types of classroom discussion in terms of how they might support the development of student intellectual authority. Central to Mayer"description of constraints and affordances of these three pedagogical arrangements is the notion of participant frameworks. Origination with Goffman, this idea allows her to examine how the teacher, the ss and the text are put in relation to one another, utterance by utterance, episode by episode. Her skillful use of this tool allows her to plumb the complexity of classroom talk by tracking its critical strands as they weave in and out.
Today teachers have great pressure to raise ss' test scores. Therefore, the administrators likely look to their teachers primarily to raise up the scores.
I propose characterising democratic pedagogical authority in relation to yet another kind of capacity: the ability to orchestrate meaningful, powerful,, and transparent knowledge construction processes' within one's classroom.
To be interested in 'knowledge construction processes' means to be interested in how knowledge is created and used by people to make sense of their worlds.
The phrase suggests that one sees knowledge as located within people who are working to understand each other and the world around them in order to be able to behave in useful and satisfying ways. In this view, knowledge does not reside in books, although authors may successfully represent aspects of their knowledge within books, and kl is not seen as infor. that can be handed unchanged from one person to another, such as a phone number. Rather, Knowledge is viewed as an ever-evolving matrix of cultured impression and understandings that each of us continually constructs as we apprehend and interact with the beings, contexts, and objects i our lives. Knowledge, as employed here, determines the ways in which each of us views, and acts upon, the world.
Chapter 1: Democratic Ideas about Knowledge
Chapter 2: Knowledge Building as Interpretation
Chapter 3: Teacher-Led Learning
Chapter 4: Student-Led Learning
Chapter 5: Co-Led Learning
Chapter 6: Educating for Democracy
to be honest, douban is not suitable for writing a reading report
In a democratic society, we might expect that one of the aims of schooling is to provide all ss with the chance to acquire intellectual authority. As mayer points out, intellectual authority concerns not just"what and how a person knows",but also that person's willingness and ability to understand the sometimes divergent views of other. This gives rise, however, to the interviewable question: how do we accomplish this aim?
a threat to the teacher's sense of control ant to ss' positioning within the social hierarchy of the classroom.
so while many people share the intuition that the thinking of an individual student can be deepen or made more robust by engaging in conversational interaction with others, it is not easy to reach consensus, or even a general framework, for how this should be done in actual classroom.
Some hold that the only goal worth striving for is student-led discussion, where the teacher principally stands to the side in appreciation. Others feel strongly that this cannot work: in order to convey the intellectual content in a way that preserves its integrity and prepares ss of further study, the teacher must invariably lead.
Based on close analyses of classrooms where discussions are long fruitful, Mayer calmly and insightfully examines the affordances and constraints of teacher-led, student-led and co-led classroom discussions. These three types are not facile reductions of the gradient interactional forms we find in actual classroom.
The core of the book consists of analyses of these three types of classroom discussion in terms of how they might support the development of student intellectual authority. Central to Mayer"description of constraints and affordances of these three pedagogical arrangements is the notion of participant frameworks. Origination with Goffman, this idea allows her to examine how the teacher, the ss and the text are put in relation to one another, utterance by utterance, episode by episode. Her skillful use of this tool allows her to plumb the complexity of classroom talk by tracking its critical strands as they weave in and out.
Today teachers have great pressure to raise ss' test scores. Therefore, the administrators likely look to their teachers primarily to raise up the scores.
I propose characterising democratic pedagogical authority in relation to yet another kind of capacity: the ability to orchestrate meaningful, powerful,, and transparent knowledge construction processes' within one's classroom.
To be interested in 'knowledge construction processes' means to be interested in how knowledge is created and used by people to make sense of their worlds.
The phrase suggests that one sees knowledge as located within people who are working to understand each other and the world around them in order to be able to behave in useful and satisfying ways. In this view, knowledge does not reside in books, although authors may successfully represent aspects of their knowledge within books, and kl is not seen as infor. that can be handed unchanged from one person to another, such as a phone number. Rather, Knowledge is viewed as an ever-evolving matrix of cultured impression and understandings that each of us continually constructs as we apprehend and interact with the beings, contexts, and objects i our lives. Knowledge, as employed here, determines the ways in which each of us views, and acts upon, the world.
Chapter 1: Democratic Ideas about Knowledge
Chapter 2: Knowledge Building as Interpretation
Chapter 3: Teacher-Led Learning
Chapter 4: Student-Led Learning
Chapter 5: Co-Led Learning
Chapter 6: Educating for Democracy
to be honest, douban is not suitable for writing a reading report
