Handling errors as they arise in whole-class interactions

References

• Bell, A. W., Swan, M., Onslow, B., Pratt, K., & Purdy, D. (1983). Diagnostic teaching for long term learning. Report of ESRC Project HR8491/1. Nottingham: Shell Centre for Mathematical Education, University of Nottingham.
   Google Scholar
• Bilmes, J. (1988). The concept of preference in conversation analysis. Language in Society, 17(2), 161–181. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500012744
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borasi, R. (1996). Reconceiving mathematics instruction: A focus on errors. Norwood: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Bray, W. S. (2011). A collective case study of the influence of teachers’ beliefs and knowledge on error-handling practices during class discussion of mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(1), 2–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bray, W. S. (2013). How to leverage the potential of mathematical errors. Teaching Children Mathematics, 19(7), 424–431.
   Google Scholar
• Brodie, K. (2014). Learning about learner errors in professional learning communities. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85(2), 221–239. doi:10.1007/s10649-013-9507-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, P., and Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ding, M., Li, X., Piccolo, D., & Kulm, G. (2007). Teacher interventions in cooperative-learning mathematics classes. The Journal of Educational Research, 100(3), 162–175. doi:10.3200/JOER.100.3.162-175
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drew, P. (2005). Conversation analysis. In K. L. Fitch & R. E. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 66–173). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, K. M. (Ed.). (1981). Children's understanding of mathematics 11–16. London: John Murray.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, K. M. (1984). Ratio: Children's strategies and errors. Windsor: NFER-Nelson.
   Google Scholar
• ten Have, P. (2007). Doing conversation analysis (2nd ed). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Heinze, A., & Reiss, K. (2007). Mistake-handling activities in the mathematics classroom: Effects of an in-service teacher training on students’ performance in geometry. In J.-H. Woo, K.-S. Park, H.-C. Lew, & D.-Y. Seo (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Conference of the International Group for the psychology of mathematics education, Seoul, Korea, July 8–13 vol. 3 (pp. 9–16). Seoul.
   Google Scholar
• Hellermann, J. (2002). The interactive work of prosody in the IRF exchange: Teacher repetition in feedback moves. Language in Society, 32(01), 79–104. doi:10.1017/S0047404503321049
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. New York: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ingram, J. (2010). The affordances and constraints of turn-taking in the secondary mathematics classroom. In M. Joubert (Ed.), Proceedings of the British society for research into learning mathematics (pp. 49–54). Newcastle: BSRLM. Retrieved from https://www.bsrlm.org.uk/IPs/ip30-3/BSRLM-IP-30-3-09.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ingram, J. (2012). Whole class interaction in the mathematics classroom: A conversation analytic approach. Coventry: University of Warwick.
   Google Scholar
• Ingram, J., & Elliott, V. (2015). A critical analysis of the role of wait time in classroom interactions and the effects on student and teacher interactional behaviours. Cambridge Journal of Education, 1–17. doi:10.1080/0305764X.2015.1009365
   Google Scholar
• Jefferson, G. (1989). Preliminary notes on a possible metric which provides for a “standard maximum” silence of approximately one second in conversation. In D. Roger & P. Bull (Eds.), Conversation: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 166–196). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Kyriacou, C., & Issitt, J. (2008). What characterises effective teacher-initiated teacher-pupil dialogue to promote conceptual understanding in mathematics lessons in England in key stages 2 and 3: A systematic review. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London. http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?tabid=2368
   Google Scholar
• Lee, Y.-A. (2007). Third turn position in teacher talk: Contingency and the work of teaching. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(6), 1204–1230. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Liebscher, G., & Dailey-O'Cain, J. (2003). Conversational repair as a role-defining mechanism in classroom interaction. The Modern Language Journal, 87(iii), 375–390. doi:10.1111/1540-4781.00196
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macbeth, D. (2011). Understanding understanding as an instructional matter. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(2), 438–451. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2008.12.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Margutti, P., & Drew, P. (2014). Positive evaluation of student answers in classroom instruction. Language and Education, ( June), 1–23. doi:10.1080/09500782.2014.898650
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markee, N., & Kasper, G. (2004). Classroom talks: An introduction. The Modern Language Journal, 88(4), 491–500. doi: 10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.t01-14-.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McHoul, A. (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society, 7(2), 183–213. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500005522
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McHoul, A. (1990). The organization of repair in classroom talk. Language in Society, 19(3), 349–377. doi: 10.1017/S004740450001455X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Clevedon: Multilingual matters.
   Google Scholar
• Movshovitz-Hadar, N. (1993). The false coin problem, mathematical induction and knowledge fragility. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 12, 253–268.
   Google Scholar
• Myhill, D. (2006). Talk, talk, talk: Teaching and learning in whole class discourse. Research Papers in Education, 21(1), 19–41. doi:10.1080/02671520500445425
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nassaji, H., & Wells, G. (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
• Radford, J., Blatchford, P., & Webster, R. (2011). Opening up and closing down: How teachers and TAs manage turn-taking, topic and repair in mathematics lessons. Learning and Instruction, 21(5), 625–635. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.01.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361–382. doi: 10.1353/lan.1977.0041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schleppenbach, M., Flevares, L. M., Sims, L. M., & Perry, M. (2014). Teachers’ responses to student mistakes in Chinese and U.S. mathematics classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 108(2), 131–147. doi: 10.1086/525551
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seedhouse, P. (1997). Review article The case of the missing “No”: The relationship between pedagogy and interaction. Language Learning, 47(3), 547–583. doi: 10.1111/0023-8333.00019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
   Google Scholar
• Seedhouse, P. (2005). State-of-the-art article conversation analysis and language learning. Language Teaching, 38, 165–187. doi:10.1017/S0261444805003010
   Google Scholar
• Sfard, A. (2007). When the rules of discourse change, but nobody tells you : Making sense of mathematics learning from a commognitive standpoint. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(4), 565–613. doi: 10.1080/10508400701525253
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair, J. M. H., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, J. P., DiSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115–163. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0302_1
   Google Scholar
• Steuer, G., Rosentritt-Brunn, G., & Dresel, M. (2013). Dealing with errors in mathematics classrooms: Structure and relevance of perceived error climate. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38(3), 196–210. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2013.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swan, M. (2002). Dealing with misconceptions in mathematics. In P. Gates (Ed.), Issues in mathematics teaching (pp. 147–165). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Swan, M. (2008). Collaborative learning in mathematics, 162–176.
   Google Scholar
• Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2011). Patterns of contingent teaching in teacher–student interaction. Learning and Instruction, 21(1), 46–57. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh, S., & Li, L. (2013). Conversations as space for learning. International Journal of Applied Linguistics (United Kingdom), 23(2), 247–266. doi:10.1111/ijal.12005
   Google Scholar
• Wells, G. (1993). Reevaluating the IRF sequence: A proposal for the articulation of theories of activity and discourse for the analysis of teaching and learning in the classroom. Linguistics and Education, 5(1), 1–37. doi:10.1016/S0898-5898(05)80001-4
   Google Scholar
• Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 458–477. doi: 10.2307/749877
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaslavsky, O. (2005). Seizing the opportunity to create uncertainty in learning mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60(3), 297–321. doi:10.1007/s10649-005-0606-5
   Google Scholar