We present a micro-analysis of post observation conversations between classroom teachers and mentors. Using the approach of conversation analysis, we show how the sequential organization of an episode (i.e., who initiates the interaction, question format used by mentors) could potentially serve to provoke or hinder teacher reflection. Our analysis reveals the different stances adopted by mentor and teacher during potentially discomfiting episodes, the relationship between the structure of initial questions, and the impact of question types on elicited teacher responses/reflections. Implications for handling this type of interaction for more effective professional development collaborations are discussed.
AkbariR. (2007). Reflections on reflection: A critical appraisal of reflective practices in L2 teacher education. System, 35, 192-207.
3.
AlsagoffL. (2007). Singlish: Negotiating culture, capital and identity. In VaishV.GopinathanS.LiuY. (Eds.), Language, capital and culture (pp. 25-46). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
4.
AlsagoffL. (2010). Hybridity in ways of speaking: The glocalization of English in Singapore. In LimL.PakirA.WeeL. (Eds.), English in Singapore: Modernity and management (pp. 109-130). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
5.
AsmuβB. (2008). Performance appraisal interviews: Preference organization in assessment sequences. Journal of Business Communication, 45, 408-429.
6.
AspforsJ.FranssonG.HeikkinenH. (2012). Mentoring as dialogue, collaborations and/or assessment? In TynjäläP.StenströmM. L.SaarnivaaraM. (Eds.), Transitions and transformations in learning and education (pp. 271-290). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
AtkinsonJ. M.DrewP. (1979). Order in court: The organisation of verbal interaction in judicial settings. London, England: Macmillan.
9.
AttardK. (2012). Public reflection within learning communities: An incessant type of professional development. European Journal of Teacher Education, 35(2), 199-211.
10.
AwayaA.McEwanH.HeylerD.LinskyS.LumD.WakukawaP. (2003). Mentoring as a journey. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 45-56.
11.
BeckI. L.McKeownM. (2006). Improving comprehension with questioning the author: A fresh and expanded view of a powerful approach. New York, NY: Scholastic.
12.
BeckI. L.McKeownM.SandoraC.KucanL.WorthyJ. (1996). Questioning the author: A yearlong classroom implementation to engage students with text. The Elementary School Journal, 96(4), 385-414.
13.
BevinsS.JordanJ.PerryE. (2011). Reflecting on professional development. Educational Action Research, 19(3), 399-411.
14.
ButtonG. (1992). Answers as interactional products: Two sequential practices used in job interviews. In DrewP.HeritageJ. (Eds.), Talk at work (pp. 212-231). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15.
ClaràM. (2015). What is reflection? Looking for clarity in an ambiguous notion. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(3), 261-271. doi:10.1177/0022487114552028
16.
ClaymanS.HeritageJ. (2002). The news interview. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
17.
Cochran-SmithM.LytleS. (1993). Inside-outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
18.
CoplandF. (2010). Causes of tension in post-observation feedback in pre-service teacher training: An alternative view. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 466-472.
19.
CoplandF. (2011). Negotiating face in feedback conferences: A linguistic ethnographic Analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3832-3843.
20.
CornishL.JenkinsK. A. (2012). Encouraging teacher development through embedded reflective practice in assessment. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(2), 159-170.
21.
DavisE. A. (2006). Characterizing productive reflection among preservice elementary teachers: Seeing what matters. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 281-301.
22.
DeweyJ. (1910). How we think. Boston, MA: D.C. Heath.
23.
DeweyJ. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
24.
DillonJ. T. (1982). The effect of questions in education and other enterprises. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 14(2), 127-152.
25.
DrewP. (1997). “Open” class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 28, 69-101.
DuFourR.DuFourR.EakerR. (2006). Professional learning communities at work plan book. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
28.
EnfieldN.StiversT.LevinsonS. C. (2010). Question-response sequences in conversation across ten languages: An introduction. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(10), 2615-2619.
29.
EricksonF. (2006). Definition and analysis of data from videotape: Some research procedures and their rationales. In GreenJ. L.CamilliG.ElmoreP. B. (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 177-191). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30.
FarrF. (2011). The discourse of teaching practice feedback. New York, NY: Routledge.
31.
FarrellT. S. C. (2012). Reflecting on reflective practice: (Re)visiting Dewey and Schön. TESOL Journal, 3(1), 7-16.
32.
FendlerL. (2003). Teacher reflection in a hall of mirrors: Historical influences and political reverberations. Educational Researcher, 32(3), 16-25. doi:10.3102/0013189X032003016
33.
FreedA. F.EhrlichS. (Eds.). (2010). “Why do you ask?” The function of questions in institutional discourse. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
34.
Gabel-DunkG.CraftA. (2004). The road to Ithaca: A mentee’s and mentor’s journey. Teacher Development, 8(2), 277-295.
35.
GardnerR. (2013). Conversation analysis in the classroom. In SidnellJ.StiversT. (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 593-611). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
36.
GartonS.RichardsK. (Eds.). (2008). Professional encounters in TESOL: Discourses of teachers in teaching. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
37.
GlazerC.AbbottL.HarrisJ. (2004). A teacher-developed process for collaborative professional reflection. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 5(1), 33-46.
38.
GlennP. J. (2003). Laughter in interaction. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
39.
GoodyE. (Ed.). (1978). Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40.
HaakanaM. (2001). Laughter as a patient’s resources: Dealing with delicate aspects of medical interaction. Text & Talk, 21, 187-219.
41.
HaironS.DimmockC. (2012). Singapore schools and professional learning communities: Teacher professional development and school leadership in an Asian hierarchical system. Educational Review, 64(4), 405-424.
42.
HayanoK. (2013). Question design in conversation. In SidnellJ.StiversT. (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 395-414). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
43.
HeathC. (1992). The delivery and reception of diagnosis in the general-practice consultation. In DrewP.HeritageJ. (Eds.), Talk at work (pp. 235-267). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
44.
HeritageJ. (2002). The limits of questioning: Negative interrogatives and hostile question content. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1427-1446.
45.
HeritageJ. (2003). Designing questions and setting agendas in the news interview. In MandelbaumJ.PhilipG.LeBaronC. (Eds.), Studies in language and social interaction (pp. 57-90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
46.
HeritageJ.MaynardD. W. (Eds.). (2006). Communication in medical care. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
47.
HeritageJ.RobinsonJ. (2006). The structure of patients’ presenting concerns: Physicians’ opening questions. Health Communication, 19(2), 89-102.
48.
HeritageJ.RobinsonJ.ElliottM. N.BeckettM.WilkesM. (2007). Reducing patients’ unmet concerns in primary care: The difference one word can make. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22(10), 1429-1433.
49.
HeritageJ.RothA. L. (1995). Grammar and institution: Questions and questioning in the broadcast news interview. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 28(1), 1-60.
50.
HusuJ.PatrikainenS.ToomA. (2007). Developing teachers’ competencies in reflecting on teaching. In ButcherJ.McDonaldL. (Eds.), Making a difference: Challenges for teachers, teaching and teacher education (pp. 127-140). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
51.
JacobyS.OchsE. (1995). Co-construction: An introduction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 28(3), 171-183.
52.
JeffersonG. (1993). Caveat speaker: Preliminary notes on recipient topic shift implicature. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26, 1-30.
53.
JeffersonG. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In LernerG. (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13-31). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
54.
JonesS.TannerH.KennewellS.ParkinsonJ.DennyH.AnthonyC.. . .LoughranA. (2009). Using video stimulated reflective dialogue to support the development of ICT based pedagogy in mathematics and science. The University of Wales Journal of Education, 14(2), 63-77.
55.
KärkkäinenE. (2003). Epistemic stance in English conversation. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
56.
KasperG.KimY. (2015). Conversation-for-learning: Institutional talk beyond the classroom. In MarkeeN. (Ed.), Handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (pp. 390-408). New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.
57.
KitzingerC. (2012). Repair. In SidnellJ.StiversT. (Eds.), Handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 229-256). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
58.
KoshikI. (2002). A conversation analytic study of yes/no questions which convey reversed polarity assertions. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1851-1877.
59.
KwekM. Y. P. (2005). English teachers using Singapore colloquial English: An examination of two secondary school teachers’ lessons (BA Academic Exercise). Singapore: National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University.
60.
LeP. T. A.VásquezC. (2011). Feedback in teacher education: Mentor discourse and intern perceptions. Teacher Development: An International Journal of Teachers’ Professional Development, 15(4), 453-470.
61.
LoughranJ. J. (2002). Effective reflective practice: In search of meaning in learning about teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 33-43. doi:10.1177/0022487102053001004
62.
MannS.WalshS. (2013). RP or “RIP”: A critical perspective on reflective practice. Applied Linguistics Review, 4(2), 291-315.
63.
MarkeeN. (Ed.). (2015). Handbook of classroom discourse and interaction. New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.
64.
MarkeeN.KunitzS. (2015). CA for SLA studies of classroom interaction: Quo Vadis? In MarkeeN. (Ed.), Handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (pp. 425-440). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
65.
MaynardD. W. (1989). Perspective-display sequences in conversation. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53, 91-113.
66.
MaynardD. W. (1991). The perspective-display series and the delivery and receipt of diagnostic news. In BodenD.ZimmermanD. H. (Eds.), Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis (pp. 162-192). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
67.
MonzoniC. M. (2008). Introducing direct complaints through questions: The interactional achievement of “pre-sequences”?Discourse Studies, 10(1), 73-87.
68.
Orland-BarakL. (2006). Convergent, divergent, and parallel dialogues: Knowledge construction in professional conversations. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 12(1), 13-31.
69.
OtienohR. O. (2011). Teachers’ lack of deeper analytical reflections: Who is to blame?Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 12(6), 733-747.
70.
PeräkyläA. (2004). Reliability and validity in research based on naturally occurring social interaction. In SilvermanD. (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (pp. 283-304). London, England: SAGE.
71.
PeräkyläA.AntakiC.VehviläinenS.LeudarI. (Eds.). (2011). Conversation analysis and psychotherapy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
72.
PomerantzA. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In AtkinsonM.HeritageJ. (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp. 57-101). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
73.
PostholmM. B. (2008). Teachers developing practice: Reflection as a key activity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1717-1728.
74.
PsathasG. (1995). Conversation analysis: The study of talk-in-interaction. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
75.
RaymondG. (2003, December). Grammar and social organization: Yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review, 68, 939-967.
76.
RichardsK. (1999). Working towards common understanding: Collaborative interaction in staffroom stories. Text, 19(1), 143-174.
77.
RichardsK. (2006). “Being the teacher”: Identity and classroom conversation. Applied Linguistics, 27, 51-77.
78.
RobinsonJ.HeritageJ. (2006). Physician’s opening questions and patients’ satisfaction. Patient Education and Counseling, 60, 279-285.
79.
RoulstonK. (2011). Reflective interviewing: A guide to theory & practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
80.
SacksH. (1987). On the preference for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In ButtonG.LeeJ. R. E. (Eds.), Talk and social organisation (pp. 54-69). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
81.
SacksH.SchegloffE.JeffersonG. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696-735.
82.
SchegloffE. A. (1989). Reflections on language, development, and the interactional character of talk-in-interaction. In BornsteinM.BrunerJ. S. (Eds.), Interaction in human development (pp. 139-153). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
83.
SchegloffE. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
84.
SchegloffE. A.JeffersonG.SacksH. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361-382.
85.
SchönD. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York, NY: Basic Books.
86.
SchönD. (1988). Coaching reflective teaching. In GrimmettP.EricksonG. (Eds.), Reflection in teacher education (pp. 19-29). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
87.
SeedhouseP. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
88.
SidnellJ. (2010). Conversation analysis: An introduction. Malden: MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
89.
SilverR. E.PngJ. (2012). CRC teacher interview/reflection protocols for post observation interviews (OER 09/10 RS). Singapore: National Institute of Education.
SteensigJ.DrewP. (2008). Introduction: Questioning and affiliation/disaffiliation in interaction. Discourse Studies, 10(1), 5-15.
92.
StokoeE.DerekE. (2008). “Did you have permission to smash your neighbour’s door?” Silly questions and their answers in police-suspect interrogations. Discourse Studies, 10(1), 89-111.
93.
ten HaveP. (2007). Doing conversation analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
94.
TillemaH. (2005). Collaborative knowledge construction in study teams of professionals. Human Resource Development International, 8(1), 81-99.
95.
TracyK.RoblesJ. (2009). Questions, questioning, and institutional practices: An introduction. Discourse Studies, 11(2), 131-152.
96.
VásquezC. (2004). “Very carefully managed”: Advice and suggestions in post-observation meetings. Linguistics and Education, 15, 33-58.
97.
WalshS. (2011). Exploring classroom discourse: Language in action. New York, NY: Routledge.
98.
WalshS. (2013). Classroom discourse and teacher development. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
99.
WaringH. Z. (2012). Yes-no questions that convey a critical stanc in the language classroom. Language and Education, 26(5), 451-469.
100.
WaringH. Z. (2013). Two mentor practices that generate teacher reflection without explicit solicitations: Some preliminary considerations. RELC Journal, 44(1), 103-119.
101.
WestC.ZimmermanD. H. (1983). Small insults: A study of interruptions in cross-sex conversations between unacquainted persons. In ThorneB.KramaraeC.HenleyN. (Eds.), Language, gender and society (pp. 102-117). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
102.
York-BarrJ.SommersW.GhereG.MontieJ. (2006). Reflective practice to improve schools: An action guide for educators (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
103.
ZeichnerK. (2008). A critical analysis of reflection as a goal for teacher education. Educãçao & Sociedade, 29(103). doi:10.1590/S0101-73302008000200012
104.
ZeichnerK. (2009). Teacher education and the struggle for social justice. New York, NY: Routledge.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
