Teacher-student discourse in active learning lectures: case studies from undergraduate physics

References

• Abeysekera, Lakmal, and Phillip Dawson. 2015. “Motivation and Cognitive Load in the Flipped Classroom: Definition, Rationale and a Call for Research.” Higher Education Research & Development 34 (1): 1–14. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2014.934336
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, R. 2006a. Education as Dialogue: Moral and Pedagogical Choices for a Runaway World. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, R. 2006b. Towards Dialogic Teaching: Rethinking Classroom Talk. Dialogos York. http://archive.teachfind.com/ttv/static.teachers.tv/shared/files/11117.doc.
   Google Scholar
• Bamford, Julia. 2005. “Interactivity in Academic Lectures: The Role of Questions and Answers.” In Dialogue within Discourse Communities, 123–146. Tubingen: Niemeyer Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Bates, S., and R. Galloway. 2012. The Inverted Classroom in a Large Enrolment Introductory Physics Course: A Case Study. In Proc. HEA STEM Conf.
   Google Scholar
• Beatty, I. D., and W. J. Gerace. 2009. “Technology-Enhanced Formative Assessment: A Research-Based Pedagogy for Teaching Science with Classroom Response Technology.” Journal of Science Education and Technology 18 (2): 146–162. doi: 10.1007/s10956-008-9140-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bishop, Jacob Lowell, and Matthew A. Verleger. 2013. “The Flipped Classroom: A Survey of the Research.” In ASEE National Conference Proceedings, Atlanta, GA. http://www.studiesuccesho.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/flipped-classroom-artikel.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Boud, David, and Elizabeth Molloy. 2013. “Rethinking Models of Feedback for Learning: The Challenge of Design.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38 (6): 698–712. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2012.691462
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, Christine. 2006. “Classroom Interaction in Science: Teacher Questioning and Feedback to Students’ Responses.” International Journal of Science Education 28 (11): 1315–1346. doi: 10.1080/09500690600621100
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, Christine, and David E. Brown. 2002. “Student-Generated Questions: A Meaningful Aspect of Learning in Science.” International Journal of Science Education 24 (5): 521–549. doi: 10.1080/09500690110095249
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, Allan, John Seely Brown, and Susan E. Newman. 1988. “Cognitive Apprenticeship.” Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children 8 (1): 2–10.
   Google Scholar
• Dennen, Vanessa P., and Kerry J. Burner. 2008. “The Cognitive Apprenticeship Model in Educational Practice.” Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology 3: 425–439.
   Google Scholar
• Deslauriers, L., E. Schelew, and C. Wieman. 2011. “Improved Learning in a Large-Enrollment Physics Class.” Science 332 (6031): 862–864. doi: 10.1126/science.1201783
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Driver, R., H. Asoko, J. Leach, P. Scott, and E. Mortimer. 1994. “Constructing Scientific Knowledge in the Classroom.” Educational Researcher 23 (7): 5–12. doi: 10.3102/0013189X023007005
   Google Scholar
• Finkelstein, Noah. 2005. “Learning Physics in Context: A Study of Student Learning about Electricity and Magnetism.” International Journal of Science Education 27 (10): 1187–1209. doi: 10.1080/09500690500069491
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford, Michael J., and Brian M. Wargo. 2012. “Dialogic Framing of Scientific Content for Conceptual and Epistemic Understanding.” Science Education 96 (3): 369–391. doi:10.1002/sce.20482.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fortanet, Inmaculada. 2004. “Enhancing the Speaker-Audience Relationship in Academic Lectures.” In Current Trends in Intercultural, Cognitive and Social Pragmatics, edited by P. Garcés, R. Gómez, L. Fernández, et al., 83–96. Seville, Spain: Kronos, S.A.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, Scott, Sarah L. Eddy, Miles McDonough, Michelle K. Smith, Nnadozie Okoroafor, Hannah Jordt, and Mary Pat Wenderoth. 2014. “Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111 (23): 8410–8415. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1319030111
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hake, R. R. 1998. “Interactive-Engagement Versus Traditional Methods: A Six-Thousand-Student Survey of Mechanics Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses.” American Journal of Physics 66: 64–74. doi: 10.1119/1.18809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, Jamie L., Tyler A. Kummer, and Patricia D. d M. Godoy. 2015. “Improvements from a Flipped Classroom May Simply Be the Fruits of Active Learning.” Cell Biology Education 14 (1): ar5.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. L. 1990. Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values. Norward, NJ: Ablex Pub. Vol. 1.
   Google Scholar
• Lyle, Sue. 2008. “Dialogic Teaching: Discussing Theoretical Contexts and Reviewing Evidence from Classroom Practice.” Language and Education 22 (3): 222–240. doi: 10.1080/09500780802152499
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazur, E. 1997. “Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual.” Physics Today 50 (4): 68–69. doi: 10.1063/1.881735
   Google Scholar
• Mehan, Hugh. 1979. Learning Lessons: Social Organization in the Classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. 2000. Words and Minds: How We Use Language to Think Together. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. 2007. “Dialogic Teaching in Science Classrooms: Full Research Report. ESRC End of Award Report.” RES-000-23-0939-A. Swindon: ESRC.
   Google Scholar
• Mortimer, Eduardo, and P. Scott. 2003. Meaning Making in Secondary Science Classrooms. Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill International.
   Google Scholar
• Nassaji, Hossein, and Gordon Wells. 2000. “What’s the Use of ‘Triadic Dialogue’?: An Investigation of Teacher-Student Interaction.” Applied Linguistics 21 (3): 376–406. doi: 10.1093/applin/21.3.376
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman, Denis, Peg Griffin, and Michael Cole. 1989. The Construction Zone: Working for Cognitive Change in School. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Connor, Catherine, and Sarah Michaels. 2007. “When Is Dialogue ‘Dialogic’?” Human Development 50 (5): 275–285. doi: 10.1159/000106415
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedrosa-de-Jesus, Helena, Patrı´cia Almeida, and Mike Watts. 2004. “Questioning Styles and Students’ Learning: Four Case Studies.” Educational Psychology 24 (4): 531–548. doi: 10.1080/0144341042000228889
   Google Scholar
• Pedrosa-de-Jesus, Helena, Betina da Silva Lopes, Aurora Moreira, and Mike Watts. 2012. “Contexts for Questioning: Two Zones of Teaching and Learning in Undergraduate Science.” Higher Education 64 (4): 557–571. doi: 10.1007/s10734-012-9512-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rule, P. N. 2015. Dialogue and Boundary Learning. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, D. R. 1989. “Formative Assessment and the Design of Instructional Systems.” Instructional Science 18 (2): 119–144. doi: 10.1007/BF00117714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, P. 2008. “Talking a Way to Understanding in Science Classrooms.” In Exploring Talk in School, 17–36. London, UK: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sinclair, John, and Malcolm Coulthard. 1975. Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The Language of Teachers and Pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stake, Robert E. 1995. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, Susan. 1998. “11 Why Ask Questions in Monologue? Language Choice at Work in Scientific and Linguistic Talk.” In Language at Work: Selected Papers from the Annual Meeting of the British Association for Applied Linguistics Held at the University of Birmingham, September 1997, 13:137. Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Tsui, Amy. 1992. “A Functional Description of Questions.” Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis, 89–110.
   Google Scholar
• Turpen, Chandra, and Noah D. Finkelstein. 2010. “The Construction of Different Classroom Norms during Peer Instruction: Students Perceive Differences.” Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research 6 (2): 020123. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.020123
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Booven, Christopher D. 2015. “Revisiting the Authoritative–Dialogic Tension in Inquiry-Based Elementary Science Teacher Questioning.” International Journal of Science Education 37 (8): 1182–1201. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2015.1023868
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wegerif, Rupert. 2013. Dialogic: Education for the Internet Age. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wells, Gordon. 2007. “Semiotic Mediation, Dialogue and the Construction of Knowledge.” Human Development 50 (5): 244–274. doi: 10.1159/000106414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, Anna K., Ross K. Galloway, Robyn Donnelly, and Judy Hardy. 2016. “Characterizing Interactive Engagement Activities in a Flipped Introductory Physics Class.” Physical Review Physics Education Research 12 (1): 010140. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010140
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, Anna K., Ross K. Galloway, Judy Hardy, and Christine M. Sinclair. 2014. “Analyzing Learning during Peer Instruction Dialogues: A Resource Activation Framework.” Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research 10 (2): 020107. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.020107
   Google Scholar
• Zoller, Uri. 1987. “The Fostering of Question-Asking Capability: A Meaningful Aspect of Problem-Solving in Chemistry.” Journal of Chemical Education 64 (6): 510–512. doi: 10.1021/ed064p510
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar