This blog entry isn't a reflection on a class. I just wanted to vent a bit about the Meth paper. So, I thought I was finished with choosing the three CI techniques for the paper. However, the more I think about this, the more confused I get. I thought my classroom interaction was more monologic, but now I'm having second thoughts on it. After this week's class, I'm a little confused about what a dialogic discourse looks like and what a monologic one looks like. Tom did mention that it all depends on the context. So, I need to look over it again to determine what type of discourse? interaction? is prevalent.
Okay... anyways... I think the CI techniques are all related to each other. For example, the F move in IRF plays a part in determining the monologic/dialogic ratio. The types of questions asked also play a part. Questions and IRF can also be used to scaffold. Corrective feedback and content feedback can be used in the F move. My biggest concern is that if/when I talk about the monologic/dialogic ratio in my paper, I won't know where to draw the line on what features to include. I feel like I can go on and on about that because it umbrellas basically everything!
I'm truly sorry if my rambling was confusing. It's a reflection of the current state of my brain. And thanks to those who have spent their precious time reading this piece of writing.
I'm having exactly the same problem. It's hard to know where one term starts and another ends! I want to be able to pin down my three CI terms, but they're so... slippery! I think I'm just gonna go for a general idea, mention things as they come up and see what happens.
ReplyDeleteI'll state my purpose, see what the data says (and which CIs prove to be relevent) and then just observe it. Otherwise I think I'll be chasing a rat!
Me three...my "future study" section is getting pretty bloated...
ReplyDeleteI believe that many of CI techniques are related to each other. They can work as a separate entity or in conjunction with another. As the "I" in IRF can be part of a Question type, as is "Feedback" an example of "wait time". I believe the purpose of the module is not only to find our faults, but to also recognize our strengths. Once we are able to draw general conclusions, we can write about how we intend to alter our faults and improve on our strengths. At least I hope This is waht we are supposed to do
ReplyDelete