Conference database for ARLE - The International Association for Research in L1 Education

ARLE Oracy 2018

Nancy Allen Johanne April Nathalie Bigras	Recognition of the distinction between productivity and complexity of the narrative microstructures of children enrolled in ECEC’s: Promoting children’s language development
Guat Poh Aw Jesmine Tan	An Exploration of the Explicit Technological Self-assessed New Media Oral Skill Learning Model for the Teaching and Learning of Mother Tongue in Singapore
Antonia Maria Bachinger Michael Krelle Sebastian Weirich	Comparing models of listening comprehension in Germany and Austria
Ulrike Behrens	Project „stịm·mig“: New types of test items for assessing „prosodic understanding“
MAUREEN BOYD	Serving a Dialogic Stance?: A Big Picture Look across Oracy Repertoire During Whole Group Instruction
Lidia Casado Ledesma Elena Martín Isabel Cuevas Fernandez	Traditional debates versus reflective discussions: Impact on argumentative strategies and perspective taking in secondary school students.
Jordi Casteleyn	Playing with improv theatre to battle public speaking anxiety
Michal Daszkiewicz	To speak or not to speak: future teachers' dilemma
Jaap C. de Jong Martijn JY Wackers	Aristotle on the beach. The effects of rhetorical techniques in oral presentations
John Gordon	Spoken quotation and the oracy of literary study
Marta Gràcia Maria-Josep Jarque Carles Riba Sonia Jarque	Self-assessment of teaching strategies and decision making to improve oral skills of kindergarten and primary school students: the use of EVALOE-SSD
Claudia Hefti Dieter Isler	Promoting oral texts in kindergarten classrooms – development of a new instrument to measure oral text abilities in kindergarten students
Tina Høegh	How to frame other people’s thinkingg? - Dialogic inquiry of literature.
Anne-Grete Kaldahl	ASSESSING ORACY: THE TEACHERS’ ORACY CONSTRUCT
Ana Isabel Mata	CANCELLED (03-04-2018) Provisional title: Investigating oral presentations in the European Portuguese L1 classroom
Seongseog Park Byeonggon Min	The effect of reflective education of conversation on reflective attitude in/on conversation
Iolanda Ribeiro Fernanda L. Viana Irene Cadime Sandra Santos	Promoting oracy in kindergarten
Atle Skaftun Åse Kari H. Wagner	Oracy in Year one: A blind spot in Norwegian language and literacy education?
Jannet van Drie	Moving Ideas. Dialogic interaction and writing in History.
Fernanda L. Viana Tânia Filipa Moniz Fernandes	«Understand for reading, reading for understanding». The explicit teaching of oracy and reading comprehension
Anneke J.G.R. Wurth	A review study on feedback and teaching oracy in secondary education
Sooyeon Yang Hyeseung Chung sun young Lee Sanghee Ryu Byeonggon Min	Korean adolescent language usage: Focusing on identity construction and power relationships in peer group interactions

Nancy Allen & Johanne April & Nathalie Bigras (Canada)
RECOGNITION OF THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRODUCTIVITY AND COMPLEXITY OF THE NARRATIVE MICROSTRUCTURES OF CHILDREN ENROLLED IN ECEC’S: PROMOTING CHILDREN’S LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 16:00-17:15

Room 5A29

Discussants: Neumann (Germany)

Context and Aim
Many studies report levels of overall uneven development from one child to another, when measured in kindergarten (Japel, 2008). Results of those studies (EQDEM, 2012) reveal that 20% of Quebecois children (Canada) evolve under conditions of vulnerability (Janus & Duku, 2007; Kershaw, 2010) in cognitive, linguistics and communication aspects (EQDEM, 2012; Smilansky & Shefatya, 1990). Moreover, the early learning of children is established through the development of their oral communication and communication under-stimulation would have consequences on the overall development of the child. Research has examined different types of knowledge among educational childcare educators working with young children, including knowledge about content (Cunningham, Davidson & Zibulsky, 2007), about concepts (Pianta, Lapari & Hamre, 2008), about procedural knowledge concerning language (Hindman & Wasik, 2011) and about the knowledge that educators use in their practice. Regardless of the type of knowledge studied, educators obtain a low result with respect to their knowledge related to the development of children’s oral communication. This talk will describe the educators’ knowledge of educational childcare regarding the development of oral communication of young children and particularly with regard to their language development and particularly in context of natural play.

Theoretical Framework
This presentation will address the educators’ knowledge and their understanding of children’s abilities for specific areas of language development which includes language production (words, clauses, phrases, gestures, etc.) and the understanding of the production of others through answers or consistent gestures. It will also address some practices that promote the development of oral communication of children who discover new structures and new words as well as interactions and strategies that are put in place in educational contexts by educators in order to enrich the oral communication of children.

Discussion and Conclusion
Language skills have an impact on the overall development of children; those with different difficulties related to oral communication, pragmatic difficulties or under-stimulated children being more likely to have difficulties in oral communication (Norbury & Bishop, 2003). Current knowledge holds that attending a quality educational environment would allow these children to have a language development comparable to that of their peers (Schachter et al., 2016; Zimmerman et al., 2009), as well as making up for various differences related to the conditions of vulnerability for their entry into kindergarten when 5 years old, which is an issue for Quebec’s education policies. We would like to open the discussion on the findings that surround the need for the specific training of educators in the development of children’s oral communication so that their interventions are planned and consistent with the needs of children. We will address the level of the educator’s experience in supporting the development of productivity and the complexity of children’s spontaneous narratives. We will also discuss that fact that we observed children’s dyads where the educators exercise less supervision and that they were more voluble.

McCabe, A., & Peterson, C. (eds.) (1991). Developing narrative structure. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Stadler, M. A., & Ward, G. C. (2011). The effect of props on story retells in the classroom. Reading horizons, 50 (3), 169–192.

Zimmerman, F. J., Gilkerson, J., Richards, J. A., Christakis, D. A., Xu, D., Gray, S., & Yapanel, U. (2009). Teaching by Listening: The Importance of Adult-child conversations to Language Development. Pediatrics, 124 (1), 342–349.

Guat Poh Aw & Jesmine Tan (Singapore)
AN EXPLORATION OF THE EXPLICIT TECHNOLOGICAL SELF-ASSESSED NEW MEDIA ORAL SKILL LEARNING MODEL FOR THE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF MOTHER TONGUE IN SINGAPORE
-

Paper session

Thursday, 09:30-10:45

Room 1A11

Discussants: Min ()

With today’s rapid technology advancement, literacy has taken a different stance as opposed to the past. To ensure that our students are fully literate in the today’s world, educators ought to prepare our students to be proficient in these new literacies. Being a small city with human capital as her core resource, developing human capital is key to stay competitive in the global economy. With this, it is pertinent to go beyond educating students with basic literacy skills, but to equip them to operate effectively in the new literacies. One recent move to future-proof our students is the move towards the use of technological media for mother-tongue language(MTL) oral assessment. Since 2014, video was used in replacement of the traditional two-dimensional graphic pictures, as a stimulus for oral examination.
Given the ethnically heterogeneous and linguistically hybrid social background, the language policy aims at cultivating bilingual proficiency in its citizens with both English language(EL) and MTL. Over the years, statistics had shown that the EL has emerged as the dominant home language in most homes. As such, MTL learning is construed as a language in-between the first language and second language, that is 1.5 per se.
As the use of media approach to engage in an oral communication requires a higher level of engagement in the cognitive skills such as memorizing and capturing of the core information through visual image and audio narrative; rapid and concurrent information processing in the MTL and speech articulation, this becomes especially challenging for 1.5 language learners. With the output language not being the dominant language, information processing needs to undergo an additional process of language code switching. Pilot study(Aw,2016) had shown that many students encounter difficulties both cognitively and language articulation during the new media oral assessment.
Hinging on these observations, an Explicit Technological Self-assessed New Media Oral Skill(ET-SOS) Learning Model(LM) was proposed to counter the challenges. Capitalising on feed-forward self-assessment and ICT learning approach, we believe that this LM will cultivate students’ cognitive and language skill, as well as, self-regulated learning competency.
Currently, two secondary schools with four classes were involved in the study to prove this concept. The research questions are as follows:
1. What are the challenges faced by teachers and students with the teaching and learning(T&L) of new media for MTL oral assessment?
2. What are the perspectives of teachers and students with T&L in the new media for MTL oral assessment?
3. How can the proposed ET-SOS LM address these challenges?
Findings showed that majority of the students cohort encountered difficulties during the oral presentation. Speech paralysis occurs when the students were performing cognitive translation. It was also cognitively challenging for students to organize their thought-flow logically and coherently to attain articulacy. Teachers too faced challenges in competency building in this new media assessment approach. Though aware of the T&L gap, the issue is yet to be addressed with a school-wide approach. Preliminary research observations had also suggested that the ET-SOS LM is effective in addressing the above issue.

Keywords : New Media Oral Skill, Explicit Technological Self-assessed Learning, Singapore Mother Tongue Teaching and Learning

References
Aw,G.P. (2016, December). The Teaching and Learning of Viewing Language: Use of Video as Stimulus in Assessing Oral skills in Mother Tongue Languages. Paper presented at The First International Conference on Chinese Language Education, Hong Kong, Hong Kong (China).
Chappuis, S. (2005). Is Formative Assessment Losing Its Meaning? Education Week, 24(44), 38. Chappuis, S., & Chappuis, J. (2007-2008). The Best Value in Formative Assessment [Electronic version]. Educational Leadership, 65, 14-19. Retrieved April 26, 2017, from: http://www.ascd.org
Davis, M., R. (2015, November). Technology fed growth in formative assessment. Education Week, 11. Retrieved April 26, 2017, from Web site: http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2015/11/11/technology-fed-growth-in-formative-assessment.html
SOH Y.A,Premalatha.P,TOO Y.P,TAN.H (2015) Use of Video as Stimulus in Assessing Oral skills in Mother Tongue Languages. https://tks.kaust.edu.sa/Academic/Elementary%20School/PrimaryYears/IBResources/ScopeandSequences/Documents/Language/Visual_language_viewing_and_presenting.pdf
Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington, Ind. : Solution Tree Press, 2011.

Antonia Maria Bachinger & Michael Krelle & Sebastian Weirich (Austria)
COMPARING MODELS OF LISTENING COMPREHENSION IN GERMANY AND AUSTRIA
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 13:15-14:30

Room 5A23

Discussants: Neumann (Germany)

L1 listening comprehension tests for the 3rd and 4th grade are part of the national educational assessment in Germany (“Vergleichsarbeiten”) and in Austria (“Standardüberprüfung”). The assessments in both countries pursue similar objectives and therefore share some common principles. They use a large number of listening comprehension tasks with several items each. To reduce individual student workload, each student works on a subset of items which results in a study design known as multiple matrix sampling design. In pilot studies, the sample size amounts to 150 students per item minimum. Hence, the size of the student sample for pilot studies depends on the total number of items. For national assessments which include multiple domains like listening comprehension, reading, and writing, total sample sizes vary between 25.000 (Germany) and 80.000 (Austria). The levels of difficulties of tasks and the competencies of students are described by means of specific competence models. These posit some hierarchically structured levels of listening comprehension.
However, there are substantial differences in the assessments between Germany and Austria with reference to test conditions, item construction, and underlying theoretical competence models. The consequences of these differences will be discussed. To name one example, German tests use rather complex listening tasks which are characterized by mostly literary stimulus texts of up to 10 minutes. Several items refer to the same stimulus material. Along with simple recognition tasks, open-constructed items allow for measurement of integrative understanding of the entire text. On the other hand, items which share the same stimulus sometimes violate assumptions of the underlying measurement models. In Austria, most stimulus texts are shorter and the corresponding items show more desirable measurement qualities. However, short texts restrict the possibilities to develop challenging tasks. This is especially true for items requiring advanced levels of analyzing and evaluating stimuli texts.
The comparison of listening comprehension assessment between Germany and Austria focuses on theoretical and methodological differences. Experiences and exemplary tasks from both countries will be shared to illustrate advantages and disadvantages. Further, possibilities to benefit from the experiences of each country for a mutual development of the respective tests will be discussed. From the perspective of comparability, equivalent conditions of testing, as well as comparable theoretical and statistical models, are essential to move towards a standardized assessment of listening comprehension in Germany and Austria.

Breit, S. /Bruneforth, M. /Schreiner, C. (2016): Bundesergebnisbericht. Standardüberprüfung 2015. Deutsch, 4. Schulstufe. Salzburg: BIFIE, p. 84-90.
Behrens, U./Böhme, K., /Krelle, M. (2009): Zuhören – Operationalisierung und fachdidaktische Implikationen. In: Bremerich-Vos, A./ Granzer, D./Köller, O. (Hrsg.), Bildungsstandards in Deutsch und Mathematik. Leistungsmessung in der Grundschule. Weinheim: Beltz, p. 357 – 375.

Ulrike Behrens (Germany)
PROJECT „STịM·MIG“: NEW TYPES OF TEST ITEMS FOR ASSESSING „PROSODIC UNDERSTANDING“
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 13:15-14:30

Room 5A23

Discussants: Neumann (Germany)

In oral communication, nonverbal and para-verbal qualities of an utterance are at least as important for understanding its meaning as the verbal information is. However, for technical reasons listening tests in the German speaking countries almost exclusively aim at understanding verbally encoded information. Consequently, prosodic aspects are barely depicted in models of competencies, as far as they are derived from large scale assessments (cp. Behrens/Böhme/Krelle 2009: 376; IQB 2013). The Swiss-German project stịm·mig aimed at addressing this much-criticized gap in listening research. For this purpose, test items were developed which are meant to measure the ability for understanding prosodic information in audio texts as an aspect of listening skills in 3rd grade students (for the construction principles and examples see Zingg Stamm et al. 2016).
In co-operation with the Institute for Educational Quality Improvement (IQB), we were able to test and evaluate the newly developed kind of items in a large German pilot study (VERA-3) including more than 4100 participants. The test takers also accomplished items on the verbal content of listening texts. For all items, the presentation mode was varied („read only“ – „read and listen“ – „listen only“). Therefore, we can also report on effects of item presentation. Finally, since the same population also took a reading test, both internal and external validation of the construct understanding prosodically encoded information is possible.
The data collection and preparation is completed. By April 2018, the statistical analysis will be accomplished. We would like to present results of the study concerning the questions mentioned above. Subsequently, perspectives for extensions of competence models by the dimension of prosodic understanding are being discussed.

References
Behrens, Ulrike/Böhme, Katrin/Krelle, Michael (2009). Zuhören. Operationalisierung und fachdidaktische Implikationen. In: Bremerich-Vos, Albert/Ganzer, Dietlinde/Köller, Olaf (Hrsg.): Bildungsstandards Deutsch und Mathematik. Leistungsmessung in der Grundschule. Weinheim, S. 357-375.
IQB (2013). Kompetenzstufenmodell zu den Bildungsstandards für das Fach Deutsch im Kompetenzbereich „Sprechen und Zuhören“ – Primarbereich – Beschluss der Kultusministerkonferenz (KMK) vom 04.03.2010. Auf Grundlage des Ländervergleichs 2011 überarbeiteter Entwurf in der Version vom 13. Februar 2013 (online verfügbar unter https://www.iqb.hu-berlin.de/bista/ksm)
Zingg Stamm, Claudia/Käser-Leisibach, Ursula/Behrens, Ulrike/ Krelle, Michael/Weirich, Sebastian (2016): Neue Aufgabenformate für die Messung von Zuhörkompetenzen. In: Keller, Stefan/Reintjes, Christian (Hrsg.): Aufgaben als Schlüssel zur Kompetenz. Didaktische Herausforderungen, wissenschaftliche Zugänge und empirische Befunde. Münster: Waxmann, S. 129-140.

Project team:
Ulrike Behrens (Uni Duisburg-Essen)
Ursula Käser-Leisibach (PH der FH Nordwestschweiz)
Michael Krelle (TU Chemnitz)
Sebastian Weirich (IQB, Berlin)
Claudia Zingg Stamm (PH der FH Nordwestschweiz)

MAUREEN BOYD (United States)
SERVING A DIALOGIC STANCE?: A BIG PICTURE LOOK ACROSS ORACY REPERTOIRE DURING WHOLE GROUP INSTRUCTION
-

Paper session

Thursday, 13:15-14:30

Room 1A11

Discussants: van Drie (Netherlands (the))

The principles of dialogic teaching and learning - jointly undertaken inquiries, open exchange of ideas, engagement with multiple voices and perspectives, and respectful classroom practices that cultivate student access and agency - cannot be enacted through a single talk move or literacy event (Alexander, 2008; Burbules, 2003). Rather, they necessarily involve a repertoire of talk purposes and practices that foster dialogic relations and serve a dialogic instructional stance (Author1, 2016). When teachers adopt a dialogic stance they frame and plan material and respond to student cues in response-able ways that work together to support individual and group meaning-making. Response-able talk practices are contingent on previous contributions, animate student ideas, and result in chains of exploratory student talk (Author 1, 2016).

In this session, we consider dialogic relations of classroom talk across time and across repertoire. Data are part of a two-year case study in a second grade urban classroom in a rust-belt city in the US. Participants are 23 seven-year-old students who come from diverse ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds, and an experienced teacher with a masters in education. Focal data are 14 writing workshop minilessons comprising an instructional unit on fairytales/folklore enacted towards the end of the school year. Minilessons represent dialogue as instruction, arguably the instructional genre least associated with DT&L as the teacher purposefully employs talk toward “a definite end” (Burbules, 1993). We conduct a sociocultural discourse analysis (Mercer, 2008) of talk within and across the 14 minilessons. Our findings explicate and provide exemplification for:
-Varied questioning and uptake moves serving different purposes
-How this teacher uses concrete contingent questioning to animate and develop student ideas, and harness and cultivate student engagement and buy-in.
-Ways shared reading content and curricular goals cultivated different perspective-taking and openness to different ways of thinking.
-Discourse conditions where these second graders could respectfully disagree and defend their viewpoints.

Importantly, our study challenges local interactional patterns alone as markers of dialogic teaching and learning. Rather we look within and across minilessons at how 1)talk functions, 2)instructional purposes, and 3)scope of what is said, work together to promote dialogic relations that serve a dialogic instructional stance and support student learning.

References
Alexander, R. J. (2008). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (4th ed.). York, UK: Dialogos.
Author 1 (2016).
Burbules, N. C. (1993). Dialogue in teaching: Theory and practice. NY: Teachers College Press.
Mercer, N. (2008). The seeds of time: Why classroom dialogue needs a temporal analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(1), 33-59.

Lidia Casado Ledesma & Elena Martín & Isabel Cuevas Fernandez (Spain)
TRADITIONAL DEBATES VERSUS REFLECTIVE DISCUSSIONS: IMPACT ON ARGUMENTATIVE STRATEGIES AND PERSPECTIVE TAKING IN SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS.
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 11:00-12:15

Room 5A29

Discussants: Rijlaarsdam (Netherlands (the))

Debate activities are instructional strategies widely used by teachers (Parker & Hess, 2001). Although the benefits of these participatory methodologies have been demonstrated (Correa, Ceballos, Correa & Batista, 2003), there are still several doubts about the conditions under which these oral contexts of participation are truly effective.

Some studies have explored how different type of discussion impacts the quality of the argumentative essays that students produce after the oral interactions (García-Mila et al., 2013; Simonneaux, 2001). In this kind of research, refutation is commonly considered the highest level of argumentative competence. However, refutation strategies are often associated with one-sided reasoning (Nussbaum & Schraw, 2007).

The aim of the present work is to explore this issue further. For that, we analyzed the influence of two oral contexts of participation, differentiated by the goal of the discussion, on: a) the ability to take perspective in the students, and b) the quality of their argumentative texts. The quality of the texts was assessed considering the strategies that imply integration of arguments and counterarguments. Furthermore, we were interested in analyzing the strategies employed during the oral interactions and not only in the written products.

The first condition of the study (persuasion) was articulated as a traditional debate in which students had to defend the assigned side in the controversy. The second condition (consensus) required students to reflect on the discussion and to reach a conclusion that integrated both sides of the controversy. The discussions were based on texts that presented opposing views about controversial issues in science. In addition, we varied the grade of participation of the students in these argumentative activities: students could act as mere observers of the discussion or as representatives of one of the positions in the discussion session.

Ninety four secondary school students, from two different high schools, participated in the study. A quasi-experimental design with pre and post measurement was used, with condition (persuasion vs. consensus) and grade of participation (observers v. representatives) as inter-subject variables. All students wrote two argumentative synthesis from texts presenting opposing views (pretest –before oral argumentation activities- and posttest -after oral argumentation activities-). Students also answered a questionnaire about taking perspectives, in pre and posttest tasks. To analyze the discursive strategies, some of the discussions were recorded and transcribed.

Our results showed that these activities were effective in improving perspective taking and integration of arguments and counterarguments, as shown in the written synthesis. However, on a secondary analysis we found that only the students with a high level of linguistic competence obtained benefits from these activities. There were no differences between the two conditions (persuasion vs. consensus), and neither we find a differential impact of the activities depending on the kind of participation (observers v. representatives). In spite of this absence of effects in the written synthesis, we did find that the integration of arguments and counterarguments was underrepresented during the oral interactions when the discussion was articulated as a traditional debate.

References

Correa, N., Ceballos, E., Correa, A.D., & Batista, L. (2003). Efectos evolutivos y contextuales en la adopción de perspectivas y en la argumentación escrita. Cultura y Educación, 15 (4), 343-356.

García-Mila, M., Gilabert, S., Erduran, S. & Felton, M. (2013). The effect of argumentative task goal on the quality of argumentative discourse. Science Education, 97,497–523.

Nussbaum, E.M. & Schraw, G. (2007). Promoting argument–counterargument integration in students’ writing. Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 59–92.

Parker, W.C. & Hess, D. (2001). Teaching with and for discussion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 273-289.

Simonneaux, L. (2001). Role-play or debate to promote students’ argumentation and justification on as issue in animal transgenesis. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 903–927.

Jordi Casteleyn (Belgium)
PLAYING WITH IMPROV THEATRE TO BATTLE PUBLIC SPEAKING ANXIETY
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 14:30-15:45

Room 5A23

Discussants: Rijlaarsdam (Netherlands (the))

In psychology studies, public speaking anxiety (PSA) is widely recognized as a distinct subtype of social phobia (Blöte et al, 2009), but L1 education and research seem to largely ignore this trait when referring to public speaking, although giving a presentation is a common sight in education. Psychology studies also show that cognitive modification, systematic desensitization and skills training are all successful treatments of PSA. This study aims at lowering the fear of public speaking and increasing the quality of public speaking via an innovative intervention program, which combines all three aforementioned treatments into a well-defined learning environment. In this respect we were inspired by the research design in the study on the teaching of charisma by Antonakis et al. (2011).

Method

In a mixed-design intervention study we assessed the impact of our program with a control group with a pre- and posttest of the personal report of confidence as a speaker (Hook et al., 2008) and videos of a 1-minute public speaking exercise. As a result, we adopted the principles of improv(isational) theatre training, and introduced them into a L1 secondary education classroom in Flanders (Belgium). For four weeks, the L1 course teacher gave a 50-minute session to a group of 18 students (average age=17 years), whereas a similar group followed a business a usual routine. A typical improv(isational) session focused on boosting creativity, learning how to take risks, and speaking without preparation in front of an audience. In short, one class group experienced the improv(isational) intervention, while the other class group attended standard lessons. Comparative judgement (Lesterhuis et al., 2017) by 8 well-experienced higher education lecturers and 5 trainee teachers determined the quality of the public speaking exercises (no misfit judges, Cronbach’s alfa = 0.80).

Results

There is no impact on the self-reported fear of public speaking and the quality of the speaking competence as measured by the speaking exercise. However, the fear of public speaking explains 22% of the variation in the quality of speaking for both groups at the first test moment. Moreover, the speaking competence of the business as usual group at test moment 1 explains 72% of the variation of this competence of this group at test moment 2, but this result cannot be retrieved for the experimental condition. Does this outcome hint at a possibly more long-term impact of the intervention, which cannot be immediately detected? Does training in improv skills disturb the status quo of education in speaking? Furthermore, qualitative analysis of the feedback produced by the comparative judgment showed a predominance of comments focussing on body language, fluency, and use of voice, although the intervention program does not explicitly refer to this. To incorporate these topics, a second study will be organized in February 2018. In collaboration with the first-year university courses ‘Proficiency: English and Dutch’ (University of Antwerp), we will now focus on undergraduate students. This paper will also discuss the preliminary results of this second study.

References

Antonakis, J., Fenley, M., & Liechti, S. (2011). Can charisma be taught? Tests of two interventions. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(3), 374-396.
Blöte, A.W., Kint, M.J., Miers, A.C., & Westenberg, P.M. (2009). The relation between public speaking anxiety and social anxiety: A review. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 23, 305-313 .
Hook, J.N., Smith, C.A.,& Valentiner, D.P. (2008). A short-form of the personal report of confidence as a speaker. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1306-1313.
Lesterhuis, M., Verhavert, S., Coertjens, L., Donche, V., & De Maeyer, S. (2017). “Comparative Judgement as a Promising Alternative to Score Competences”. In: Cano, E. & Ion, G. (2017). Innovative Practices for Higher Education Assessment and Measurement. Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-0531-0.ch007 

Michal Daszkiewicz (Poland)
TO SPEAK OR NOT TO SPEAK: FUTURE TEACHERS' DILEMMA
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 14:30-15:45

Room 5A29

Discussants: Wurth (Netherlands (the))

Theoretical and vocational CONTEXT
The study is based on the fundamental premise on the primary and expanding educational role of language (Daszkiewicz 2017, Wasilewska 2017) (underlying and giving rise to the Educational Role of Language Network). It juxtaposes what BA students of early education think of widely understood classroom use of language (language beliefs) against their actual use of it (language actions) and involves respondents whose professional job is about to consist in shaping children’s understanding of the world through language and whose limited classroom use at university is – in the light of that communication-based job – both disturbing and surprising.

PROBLEMS & HYPOTHESES
The key question pertaining to their language beliefs is whether they view oral language as (a) supporting classroom activities (only), and/or (b) as beneficial to learning, and/or (c) as an educational value per se, and/or (d) as a personal attribute worth developing for whichever reasons (Wenzel 2015; Voice21/English-Speaking Union 2017). On the level of language actions it is studied whether the teachers-to-be justify their decisions to speak or not to speak in the classroom with arguments falling into the affective, worldview, psychomotor or cognitive domain. It is hypothesized in the study that (1) students see oracy as more essential for classroom activities and learning than for overall education and personal development; (2) students see oracy as supportive to learning, yet this is not confirmed by their actions in the university classroom; (3) students’ decisions to speak are mostly explained by emotional factors; (4) students’ decisions not to speak are most strongly affected by emotional and worldview factors (jointly referred to as ‘personal’) (the four-domain approach prompted by Niemierko 2009).

TOOLS & FINDINGS
The study is based on a questionnaire comprising two parts, one pertaining to language beliefs (with 16 Likert-five-degree-scale items, 4 items per each of the perceived purposes of classroom speech (a)-(d) above) and the other to language actions (with 16 similar items pertaining to the four educational domains). With four indexes pertaining to the four said domains, the study proves the first two and the last hypothesis right, but disproves the third one, which can be construed as implying that the respondents are easily discouraged from oral expression in the classroom, but not strongly convinced to do so of their own will. This has far-reaching consequences for them as well as for those whom they are going to teach. The most general conclusion to be drawn from the study’s findings is that oral language is seen as subservient to education rather than the other way round, which in the case of L1 education is – taking into consideration our knowledge gained from the so-called linguistic turn – far from being desired.

Keywords: language beliefs, language actions, early education teachers, classroom speech, personal decisions to speak (or not to speak)

References
Daszkiewicz M. (2017). Educational Role of Language – Its Multi-faceted Scope and Its Social Complexity, (in:) Daszkiewicz M., Wasilewska A., Filipiak E., Wenzel R. Educational Role of Language, Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Naukowe “Katedra”, 47-72.
Niemierko B. (2009), Diagnostyka edukacyjna, Warszawa 2009: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Voice 21/English-Speaking Union (2017). Speaking Frankly. The case for oracy in the curriculum, https://www.esu.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0025/13795/ESU-Speaking-Frankly.pdf. s
Wasilewska A. (2017). Expansion of the linguistic paradigm in studies on childhood and school, (in:) Daszkiewicz M., Wasilewska A., Filipiak E., Wenzel R. Educational Role of Language, Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Naukowe “Katedra”, 137-150.
Wenzel R. (2015). Language education and teaching by the learner’s text creation, (in:) K. Janczukowicz, Rychło M. (Eds), General Education and Language Teaching Methodology. The Gdańsk School of ELT, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 113-134.

Jaap C. de Jong & Martijn JY Wackers (Netherlands (the))
ARISTOTLE ON THE BEACH. THE EFFECTS OF RHETORICAL TECHNIQUES IN ORAL PRESENTATIONS

Aristotle on the beach
The effects of rhetorical techniques in oral presentations
What is an effective introduction of a presentation? How should a speaker conclude? Public speaking textbooks contain many answers to these questions and advise an abundance of rhetorical techniques to give an effective speech. The value of such public speaking advice is hard to assess, as it is hardly ever founded in evidence-based research. De Jong (Leiden University) and Wackers (Delft University of Technology) have studied the effects of rhetorical techniques in speeches and informative presentations. They have mapped the presentation practice of various genres (research presentations, political speeches and TED talks) and performed experiments into the effect of specific rhetorical techniques (e.g. starting with an anecdote, giving a summary, using self-deprecation) on the audience’s information retention and appreciation for the speaker. How can teachers in primary, secondary and higher education benefit from these insights to enrich the content of their oral skills classes?

Prof. dr. Jaap de Jong is professor of Journalism and New Media at the Faculty of Humanities of Leiden University (The Netherlands). He lectures in rhetoric, style in politics and in journalism. As a researcher he wrote books and articles on the exordium and the peroration of (political) speeches and of stylistical and rhetorical aspects of journalism. He is editor of Dutch language journal Onze Taal, co-founder of the Leidse Werkgroep Retorica and of the yearly national speech tournament, Max Havelaar toesprakentoernooi. De Jong is co-author of books as Bending opinion, Essays on Persuasion in the Public Domain (2010), Visual Language, Perspectives for both Makers and Users (2012), Pics or it did not happen (2012) and Beïnvloeden met emoties. Pathos en retorica (2015).
E-mail: j.c.de.jong@hum.leidenuniv.nl

Martijn Wackers (MA) is lecturer in communicative skills at the Centre for Languages and Academic Skills at Delft University of Technology in The Netherlands, where he teaches various communication skills courses and coordinates the Graduate School courses Presenting Scientific Research and Writing a Dissertation. He received Master’s degrees in Rhetoric & Argumentation and Journalism from Leiden University. He is currently board member of the Rhetoric Society of Europe and his PhD research at Leiden University focuses on the influence of rhetorical techniques on audience information retention – or, in short: what makes a message memorable. In 2012, he co-authored a Dutch-language textbook containing evidence based presentation advice (Presenteren: wat werkt echt en wat echt niet?). Finally, he has coached speakers for various TEDxDelft events, TU Delft participants in the Fame Lab competition and participated as a coach in the Max Havelaar speech tournament.

John Gordon (United Kingdom (The))
SPOKEN QUOTATION AND THE ORACY OF LITERARY STUDY
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 13:15-14:30

Room 5A29

Discussants: Min ()

Abstract

Context and aims

This paper explores quotation use in L1 literary study during discussion of novels in junior and senior classrooms in the UK. It finds theories of quotation do not account for functions of spoken quotation in pedagogy, proposing it be understood differently from written quotation. Teachers of literature often guide students to written literary criticism, where quotations are central, without recognising the distinctive behaviour of spoken quotation relative to written quotations. The distinction is important: if better understood, it has potential to inform more effective literary pedagogy to bridge reading and writing. Oral use of quotations, an oracy distinctive to literary study, mediates the process and is fundamental to its success.
Aims:
i) articulate differing characteristics of spoken and written quotation according to their modality;
ii) demonstrate spoken quotation in action in transcript data;
iii) apply an adapted form of Conversation Analysis that recognises the study text as a seminal voice in literary classroom discourse;
iv) identify the distinctive behaviour of spoken quotation in pedagogical exposition and student response;
v) consider how literary pedagogy can be refined once the distinctiveness of spoken quotation is understood;
vi) propose a distinctive oracy of literary study with spoken quotation use at its heart.

Data

Data derives from fieldwork in four UK schools (two primary, two secondary). In each teachers shared and discussed novels with classes over a series of lessons; the researcher recorded three to six hours of teaching over four consecutive weeks, observing classes at least weekly across November and December 2016.

Methods

Bakhtin’s concepts of speech genre, utterance and heteroglossia inform a methodological innovation adapting Conversation Analysis to interpret transcripts drawn from two schools. The amended approach, called Quotation in Talk in Exposition (QuoTE) analysis, recognises the voice of the study text embedded in participants’ utterances. Isolating them in the transcript affords close analysis of the behaviour of quoted details, as their modality is transformed in the shift from page to speech.

Results

Spoken quotation is identified as the seminal resource in teachers’ third-turn exposition, realising pedagogical metanarration in literary teaching. It is key to the quality of students’ reading experience and competence in literary analysis. In transcript data, students’ use of spoken quotation displays apparently intuitive patterning and strategy, though opportunities to exploit this are often undeveloped by teachers. The meaning-potential of spoken quotation differs from written quotation, being highly situated and contingent. Arguments and positions held by speakers about study texts may be expressed in the spoken quotation alone, understood by participants as they interpret their intonation and function in the wider exchange.

Discussion

Heteroglot switching around spoken quotation constitutes a core resource in literary pedagogy, reflecting and arising from heteroglossia’s salience in the literary form of the novel. Teachers use spoken quotation as a device for pedagogical metanarration, foregrounding important phenomenon in the diegetic world of the story, dramatizing characters, demonstrating structural features of text and cueing students’ analytic orientation to it. How students respond to this is less clear, particularly how they might develop responses beyond the engagement these functions promote.

Marta Gràcia & Maria-Josep Jarque & Carles Riba & Sonia Jarque (Spain)
SELF-ASSESSMENT OF TEACHING STRATEGIES AND DECISION MAKING TO IMPROVE ORAL SKILLS OF KINDERGARTEN AND PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS: THE USE OF EVALOE-SSD
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 14:30-15:45

Room 5A29

Discussants: Wurth (Netherlands (the))

Context: School is an essential context that contributes to children’s communicative competence. In-class interactions between children and teacher and among children themselves have been assessed with different type of instruments. Decision Support Systems (DSS) are tools that can help teachers to assess their own practice and to make decisions to improve it (Gregg, 2009; Kalay & Chen, 2002).
Aims: Construction, implementation and validation of a Decision Support System (EVALOE-DSS), conceived as a teacher empowerment tool for self-assessment and decision making about their teaching practice concerning students’ oral skills.
Methods: EVALOE-DSS is a multimedia tool based on EVALOE (Gràcia et al., 2015), consisting of 30 items that assess 5 dimensions: teaching management, instructional design, communicative functions and teacher strategies, students’ communicative functions, and students’ management. It includes, also, a brief description of each item and a variety of resources to help teachers to make decisions and introduce the actions in their teaching practice. This project uses a qualitative and quantitative methodology and adopts a multiple case design. The participants are 6 teachers and their groups of students (kindergarten and primary level) of one inclusive school with a bilingual cross-modal project, four inclusive schools, one International school, and one Special Education school. The research procedure includes: design and development of a DSS for each type of school; assessment of children initial linguistic competence; researcher assessment of one classroom observation using EVALOE-DSS; weekly teacher self-assessment of classroom observation and decision making using EVALOE-DSS on the basis of initial researcher assessment, during an academic year; analysis of assessments, decision making and changes in teaching practices; teacher-researcher evaluation of the helpfulness of DSS and introduction of changes; and assessment of children linguistic competence at the end of the academic year.
Results: The results of our multiple case study show that the teachers contributed actively to the implementation of the tool, doing weekly self-assessments, making decisions and introducing changes in their classes. Specifically, their helped the researchers to improve the tool proposing them the introduction of changes and adjustments in the tool. The teachers have improved their strategies and the students, their oral skills.
Discussion: The use of a DSS can contribute to improve teachers’ competence to self-assess and make decisions about their teaching practice and to detect the conditions and strategies that allow students to be more linguistically active, participative, critical and self-regulated while they are carrying on class activities. The reflections and comments of the teachers have been very helpful to improve the multimedia tool.

Gràcia, M. (coord). (2015). EVALOE. Escala de valoración de la enseñanza de la lengua oral en contexto escolar. Análisis de las interacciones comunicativas entre docentes y alumnos en el aula [Assessment scale of oral language teaching. Analysis of communicative interactions between teachers and students in the classroom]. Barcelona: Graó.

Gregg, D. (2009). Developing a collective intelligence application for special education Decision Support Systems, 47, 455-465.

Kalay, P. & Chen, D. (2002). Integrating a Decision Support System into a School, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34 (4), 435-452.

Claudia Hefti & Dieter Isler (Switzerland)
PROMOTING ORAL TEXTS IN KINDERGARTEN CLASSROOMS – DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW INSTRUMENT TO MEASURE ORAL TEXT ABILITIES IN KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 09:30-10:45

Room 5A29

Discussants: Rijlaarsdam (Netherlands (the))

Co-Authors: Claudia Hefti (co-presenter), Katharina Kirchhofer, Iris Dinkelmann

Challenging communicative tasks such as reporting real life experiences, inventing stories, explaining knowledge or negotiating points of view are essential in classroom communication and crucial for successful academic learning. In addition, higher order abilities on the text or discourse level are key for the production and comprehension of written texts (Ruddell & Unrau, 2004). If provided with the opportunities and tailored support by their language models (Bruner, 1983 [2002]), children begin to acquire these abilities as soon as they start using oral language to represent complex information transcending the space of shared perception. However, young children's familiarity with these oral texts varies widely depending on the linguistic and educational practices in their families (Heller, 2012). Furthermore, educators in daycare institutions and kindergarten classrooms do not yet sufficiently focus on promoting linguistically and cognitively challenging conversations (König, 2006). As recent studies show, the interactional support provided by educators and teachers can be improved by professional development, and progress in teacher support positively affects the children's language acquisition (Piasta, 2012). These promising results have not yet been confirmed for children's higher order text abilities, though.

The intervention study «Promoting oral texts in kindergarten classrooms» aims at supporting teachers to purposefully and effectively promote the production of oral texts in everyday kindergarten communication. In a pre-post-follow-up-design with intervention and control group (80 teachers and 480 children in total), the quality of the teacher's interactional support and the abilities of the children to produce oral texts will be measured at the beginning of the first (t0) and the second (t1) as well at the end of the second (t2) year of kindergarten. The teachers of the intervention group will receive a nine months professional development program consisting of both individual video-based coaching and small group coursework. The instrument needed for measuring of the children's oral text abilities has already been developed and tested. The instrument focusing on the quality of teacher interaction is currently under construction.

The proposed contribution will focus on the measurement of children's oral text abilities: In an individual setting, the children first watch a short animated movie (free of verbal language) and then retell the story to the researcher. The video recordings are transcribed and the children's oral text productions extracted. These oral texts are assessed using a standardized rating instrument based on a new theoretical model focusing on higher order text abilities and combining existing theoretical perspectives. In our paper, we will present the theoretical foundations, the materials and procedures of data collection, the rating instrument and the statistical analysis of a trial with 109 children from nine kindergarten classrooms. Our results can contribute to the discussion of the measurement of oral language abilities. In addition, the design of the planned intervention study and the conceptual relations between oracy and literacy may be discussed.

References:
Bruner, J. (1983 [2002]). Wie das Kind sprechen lernt. Bern: Hans Huber.
Heller, V. (2012). Kommunikative Erfahrungen von Kindern in Familie und Unterricht. Passungen und Divergenzen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
König, A. (2006). Dialogisch-entwickelnde Interaktionsprozesse zwischen ErzieherIn und Kind(ern). Eine Videostudie aus dem Alltag des Kindergartens (Dissertation). Dortmund: Universität Dortmund
Piasta, S., Justice, L., Cabell, S., Wiggins, A., Turnbull, K. & Curenton, S. (2012). Impact of professional development on preschool teachers’ conversational responsivity and children’s linguistic productivity and complexity. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27, 387–400.
Ruddell, R. B. & Unrau, N. J. (2004). Introduction. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical Models and processes of Reading. Fifth Edition (pp. 1116–1126). Newark DE: International Reading Association.

Tina Høegh (Denmark)
HOW TO FRAME OTHER PEOPLE’S THINKINGG? - DIALOGIC INQUIRY OF LITERATURE.
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 13:15-14:30

Room 5A29

Discussants: Min ()

Research has shown that student centered dialog still is a rare form in classrooms (Reznitskaya 2012; Lyle 2008). Student centered dialog is communicative formats that supports the student’s own thinking and further elaborations. It is difficult for the teacher to send the thinking and reasoning back to the students (Sulzer 2015; Beck & McKeown 2007). Instead we find forms of discourse where the teacher takes responsibility and control over the knowledge and questions to ask and answer in the interaction around texts: “[...] recitation and, more recently, pseudo-inquiry continue to dominate teacher–student communication” (Reznitskaya & Gregory 2013: 129). At the same time, the whole-class dialog is still considered to be important for interpretation, meaning construction and consolidation of knowledge in the classroom.
In the presentation, I suggest and discus methodologies of research in and development and practice of inquiry based literature education generated with teachers and their teams.
The investigation is part of a large-scale intervention project named Quality in Danish and Mathematics (KiDM). KiDM is a nationwide research- and development project involving more than a hundred schools and thirty researchers through 2016-2018. In the part concerning L1, Danish, the intention is to investigate and develop literature teaching in grade 7-8 by establishing og continuously adjusting (theory of change approach) an inquiry based literature teaching. The project is designed as a multifaceted intervention program with four continuous phases: 1) a preliminary study and systematic review over research, 2) development of the intervention and pilot study of a web-mediated teaching material developed, realized and evaluated in cooperation with teachers in twenty schools, 3) a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in three iterative cycles that will test the intervention’s quantitative effect, and 4) qualitative studies that investigates the subject specific qualities the intervention leads to from student and teacher perspectives in a local school and classroom context.
My hypothesis is, that since KiDM’s focus is inquiry based literature teaching, a change of the teacher’s management of the classroom dialog will be a crucial point to intervene.
The current investigation is carried out as part of the qualitative research (4) and conducted as a field study with three researchers present doing video-observation, taking field notes, and interviewing teacher and students. Theoretically the basis is sociocultural and phenomenological interest in the participants’ collaborative processes as well as a first-person perspective (Høegh 2017). I focus on operationalization of a) outlining the features of the classroom dialog before and after the intervention in the teacher-team by a dialogic tool for the team's development of inquiry based teaching; b) the collection of the individual teacher's as well as the local teacher-team’s opinion, use and further development of the dialogic tool; and c) the collection of both the teacher’s and a number of students’ experiences with the realized classroom dialog.

In the presentation I discus the hypothesis about dialogic teaching as a key for inquiry based literature studies in the classroom. Secondly, I discus the conditions for and the capability through to this intervention to change classroom dialog. Thirdly, I will discuss methodological conflicts and possibilities.

Keywords:
Dialogic inquiry education, inquiry based literature teaching, intervention, teacher team development.

References:
Beck, I. L. & McKeown, M. G. (2007) How Teachers Can Support Productive Classroom Talk: Move the Thinking to the Students. in Rosalind Horowitz (Ed.) Talking Texts: How Speech and Writing interact in School learning (p. 207-220). New York: Routledge.
Høegh, T. (2017). Methodological issues in analyzing human communication – the complexities of multimodality. In D. Duncker, & B. Perregaard (Eds.), Creativity and Continuity: Perspectives on the Dynamics of Language Conventionalisation (Chapter 4, pp. 83-127). Copenhagen: U Press.
Lyle, S. (2008). Dialogic Teaching: Discussing Theoretical Contexts and Reviewing Evidence from Classroom Practice. Language & Education: An International Journal, 22(3), 222-240.
Sulzer, M.A. (2015) Exploring Dialogic teaching with middle and secondary English language art teachers: a reflexive phenomenology. PhD thesis, University of Iowa: http://ir.uiowa.edu/etd/1912 (visited Oct.29, 2016)
Reznitskaya, A. (2012). Dialogic teaching: Rethinking Language Use During Literature Discussions. The Reading Teacher, 65(7), 446–456. Wiley on behalf of The international Literacy Association.
Reznitskaya, A. & Gregory, M. (2013) Student Thought and Classroom Language: Examining the Mechanisms of Change in Dialogic Teaching. EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST, 48(2), 114–133.

Anne-Grete Kaldahl (Norway)
ASSESSING ORACY: THE TEACHERS’ ORACY CONSTRUCT
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 09:30-10:45

Room 5A29

Discussants: Rijlaarsdam (Netherlands (the))

Keywords: Assessment of oracy, the teachers’ oracy construct, rhetoric

The ability to use the oral language to express oneself and communicate with others is a key competency in being a competent citizen in the Norwegian school system and in the democratic society (Rychen & Salganik, 2003, Norwegian Knowledge Promotion, 2007).
This article reports on an exploratory quantitative investigation into the teachers’ assessment on oracy across subjects on a high stake, oral, national exam in 10th grade in Norway. The aim is to detect the teachers’ implicit oracy construct through surveying 495 teachers. The teachers’ professional judgement is presumed to be based on a tacit understanding of oracy, and curriculum standards (after LK06 where oral competency became a key competency). Yet little is in fact known on how teachers define and assess oracy.
1) What oracy dimensions do teachers value when assessing oral competency across different subject domains in 10th grade on high stake, oral exams in lower secondary schools?
2) What is the teachers’ implied empirical construct definition of oracy in 10th grade on high stake, oral exams in lower secondary schools?
What the teachers are trying to form an assessment opinion about is called a construct (Kane, 2006). This is not a construct in a psychometric understanding (Kane, 2006), but more an implicit, quasi, tacit construct to be seeked in the teachers’ experienced knowledge base (Polyani, 1966).
The survey is conceptualized, and results interpreted with rhetorical resources (Aristotle) and assessment theory (Kane, 2006). The validating process of the surveying instrument for taping into teachers’ assessment of oracy using SPSS 24 and factor analysis is presented.
The results from the analysis of the survey revile, that the content of the utterance is the most valued part of oral competency. The teachers value a complex oracy construct, which is consistent within subjects. The teachers develop a unified oracy construct through their culture and traditions when given freedom to practice through vague policies.

Aristoteles, 2006 (ca.33fvt.). Retorikken. Oslo: Vidarforlaget
Kane, M. (2006). Validation. I:R.L. Brennan (Red.) Educational Measurement, 6, s.17-64.
Norwegian Knowledge Promotion, (2007) Udir. Oslo
Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. London. Routledge.
Rychen, D. S., & Salganik, L. H. (eds.) 2003: Key Competencies for a Successful Life an a Well-Functioning Society. Hogrefe & Huber, Washington og Göttingen.

Ana Isabel Mata (Portugal)
CANCELLED (03-04-2018) PROVISIONAL TITLE: INVESTIGATING ORAL PRESENTATIONS IN THE EUROPEAN PORTUGUESE L1 CLASSROOM
-

Paper session

Thursday, 11:00-12:15

Room 1A11

Chair: Auli,

Discussants: Rijlaarsdam (Netherlands (the))

Investigating oral presentations in the European Portuguese L1 classroom

ABSTRACT
The development of spoken language skills (including both oral expression and oral comprehension skills) is nowadays recognized as important / mandatory in L1. However, this is still one of the most overlooked areas of language learning and instruction in Portugal, as language assessment continues literacy-centered. Former trainee teachers’ perceptions about oracy instruction and assessment in European Portuguese as L1 indicate that: (i) they are far from satisfied with the level of development of adolescent students in oracy; (ii) students' difficulties and low motivation for speech production tasks is one of the main factors that hinder the training of oracy in their classes (Mata & Rovira, 2017). Research comparing adolescents and adults in a classroom context (e.g. Mata et al., 2014; Mata & Moniz, 2016), shows how speakers adapt to speaking styles required at school (e.g. Mata, 2017) and suggests that the development of spoken language skills should be more highly valued by teachers in Basic and Secondary Education.
This study focuses on oral presentations. These are one of the main classroom tasks to train students' prepared speech production and to develop students' communicative fluency. The study uses a subset of CPE-FACES, a corpus of European Portuguese spoken by teenagers and adults in school context (16h). This subset comprises 9 spontaneous presentations and 9 prepared unscripted presentations, from 6 students (14-15 year olds, 9th grade, balanced by gender) and 3 teachers (2 women and 1 man), all speakers of standard European Portuguese (Lisbon region). Based on the analysis of this subset (comprising word-by-word time aligned orthographic transcripts, enriched with the annotation of disfluencies and prosodic patterns), the presentation will summarize the key findings on speaking style variation at school, giving an overview of student adaptation strategies to oral presentation tasks, in terms of prosodic variation strategies, disfluencies and communicative fluency. In future research work, we intend to explore the effects of such strategies on teachers’ perceptions and their assessment of students' oral expression skills.

REFERENCES
Mata, Ana Isabel (2017). Teaching oracy to adolescent students in L1: trainee teachers’ approaches. ARLE 2017. Tallin, 15-17 June.
Mata, Ana Isabel & José María Rovira (2017). Oracy in teacher education: perspectives from L1 and L2. Bringing together research and practice: Language teaching, language learning and teacher training in Portuguese and Spanish, Lisbon, 2-3 November.
Mata, A. I. & H. Moniz (2016). Prosódia, variação e processamento automático. In A. M. Martins & E. Carrilho (eds.), Manual de Linguística Portuguesa. MRL Series, Mouton de Gruyter: 116-155.
Mata, A. I., H. Moniz, F. Batista, J. Hirschberg (2014). Teenage and adult speech in school context: building and processing a corpus of European Portuguese. Proceedings 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation - LREC 2014, European Language Resources Association (ELRA): 3914-3919.

Seongseog Park & Byeonggon Min (Korea (The Republic Of))
THE EFFECT OF REFLECTIVE EDUCATION OF CONVERSATION ON REFLECTIVE ATTITUDE IN/ON CONVERSATION
-

Paper session

Thursday, 14:30-15:45

Room 1A11

Discussants: Wurth (Netherlands (the))

Reflection helps in problem solving (Dewey, 1933). The difference between professionals and novices revolves around how they reflect on their practices (Schon, 1983). Furthermore, it is crucial for practices to receive the right direction that practitioners critically reflect on their premises (Mezirow, 1991). Many scholars in education have emphasized the importance of reflective education for practice. Oracy is a competency relevant in communicational practices; as such, oracy educators need to regard reflective education as a significant aspect of their pedagogy. Conversation can be defined as interpersonal communication, which is a dialectically dynamic process (Baxter & Montgomery, 1996), as well as a kind of social system that is operated by double contingency (Luhmann, 1984). Thus, there are no strategies or skills that are useful in every conversational context. In this setting, this research regards reflective education as a way to encourage students’ competence to cope with their diverse conversational situations. This research aims to design education for encouraging reflective conversants, and verify the effect of the design. Our design includes three classes: (a) abductive inference of intention, (b) dialectically dynamic regulation of self-disclosure, and (c) personal orientations in conversation. All of these classes have two phases: theory learning and reflecting on one’s conversations. Reflective-journal-writing and peer-group-dialogue are conducted in the second phase. To examine the effect of our design, 90 students were divided into three groups (experiment, comparison, and control). The experiment group participated in the full range of classes including (a), (b), and (c), while the comparison group participated in (a) and (b). The control group did not participate in the classes. All students’ reflective attitude in/on conversation (RAC) were measured three times (before, after, and delayed) by QRAC (Min & Park, in press). The result of RM-ANOVA showed that the experiment and comparison groups’ RAC increased significantly after participating while the control group did not. In addition, the experiment group showed increases in all three constructs of RAC (Thoughtful Action, Process/Content Reflection, and Premise Reflection), while the comparison group did not show increase in Premise Reflection. Some implications will be discussed.

Baxter, L. A., & Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialectics. Guilford Press.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the reflective thinking to the educative process. Heath.
Luhmann, N. (1984). Soziale systeme (Vol. 478). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schon, D. (1983). The reﬂective practitioner.

Iolanda Ribeiro & Fernanda L. Viana & Irene Cadime & Sandra Santos (Portugal)
PROMOTING ORACY IN KINDERGARTEN
-

Paper session

Thursday, 14:30-15:45

Room 1A11

Discussants: Wurth (Netherlands (the))

According to the Simple View of Reading model (SVR, Gough & Tunmer, 1986), reading (R) is a product of decoding (D) and oral language (L). This multiplicative relation transmits the idea that both terms of the equation are absolutely necessary. Although affirming that this equation is false, because there is not a mathematical demonstration to prove it, Ramus (2015) considers that the SVR, in its simplicity, captures a very and reliable intuition about what it means to understand a text.
Research in the last decades has shown that the contribution of decoding and oral language for reading comprehension changes across school grades. In the early primary grades reading is very dependent on the decoding competencies. With the progress of schooling, decoding gets automatized, but the oral language competencies are more and more necessary to deal with the increased complexity of the texts.
If the research shows the growing importance of the oral language, from a didactical point of view the promotion of oracy development (comprehensive and productive) is not enough valued by teachers, namely when students are learning to read in their native language. By the entry of first grade of primary school, the basal language is acquired, but there is an enormous potential for linguistic growth (Sim-Sim, 1998).
The program “Understand for reading, reading for understanding” (CPL-LPC) is a program for the explicit teaching of comprehension in 2nd school grade. The main goals of this program are: to promote oracy and reading comprehension; to help children become aware about the linguistic and cognitive processes required at the different comprehension levels (literal, inferential, reorganization and critic).
The last goal was ambitious for children between 7-9 years old. In order to support the children in the management of the comprehension processes, a set of characters was created (Viana et al., 2010, http://hdl.handle.net/1822/11219, pp.247-254). These playful and appealing characters are: Vicente Inteligente (Intelligent Vicente) Gustavo Significado (Meaningfull Gustavo); Juvenal Literal (Literal Juvenal); Durval Inferencial (Inferential Durval); Conceição Reorganização (Reorganisation Conceição); Francisca Crítica (Critical Francisca ) and Glória Memória (Memory Glória). As can be inferred by their names, each character represents an important process of comprehension.
The program CPL-LPC consists of 29 weekly sessions of 60 minutes each. A set of 29 texts was selected (17 for oracy and 12 for reading comprehension) according to several linguistic and literary criteria. A set of tasks (namely questions) oriented towards the comprehension processes (process oriented questions) was designed for each text.
The first 17 texts were read by the teacher and explored only orally. The last 12 texts were read by the students and all the tasks were written tasks.
The impact of the CPL-LPC was assessed through a quasi-experimental study (with pre and post-test) conducted with a sample of 90 children (n = 40 Control Group; n = 50 Experimental Group) from 2nd primary grade. The children were assessed through standardized tests (a Language Test, a Word Recognition Test and a Reading Comprehension Test).
The differences between groups in the language and reading comprehension tests are statistically significant for the experimental group. For reading comprehension, only at the literal comprehension level no significant changes were registered. The characters created have proven to be extremely effective and motivational resources for supporting the process of meta-comprehension.
Key words: oracy, reading comprehension, program.
References
Gough, P., & Tunmer, W. (1986). Decoding, reading and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10.
Ramus, F. (2015). Alfabetização: Que habilidades estão envolvidas. Como avaliar. In J. J. Morais & J. B. A. Oliveira (Orgs.), Alfabetização. Em que consiste. Como avaliar (pp.41-59). Brasília: Instituto Alfa e Beto.
Sim-Sim, I. (1998). O desenvolvimento da linguagem. Lisboa: Universidade Aberta.
Viana, F. L. Ribeiro, I. S., Fernandes, I., Ferreira, A., Leitão, C., Gomes, S., Mendonça, S. & Pereira, L. (2010). O ensino da compreensão leitora. Da teoria à prática pedagógica. Coimbra: Almedina. Retrieved in 18 november 2017 from: http://hdl.handle.net/1822/11219

Atle Skaftun & Åse Kari H. Wagner (Norway)
ORACY IN YEAR ONE: A BLIND SPOT IN NORWEGIAN LANGUAGE AND LITERACY EDUCATION?
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 16:00-17:15

Room 5A29

Discussants: Neumann (Germany)

Oral communication is a main area in the Norwegian L1 subject, alongside written communication and content area knowledge (language, literature and culture), and the competence aims after Year 2 all point towards key aspects of talk and conversation. Nevertheless, oral communication in general (and even more so oracy conceived of as a more specific approach to oral language as a primary system of thinking tools (Vygotskij, 1986; Mercer, 2000)) has received little attention compared to reading and literacy over the last ten years. More astonishing is it that oracy in primary school rarely is considered in conjunction with the established and well-developed traditions for rich linguistic environments in Kindergarten, where explorative conversations and dialogic reading are viewed as important tools.

The paper is based on observations of L1 lessons in 6 Year one classrooms, preparing the ground for a more in-depth video supported fieldwork in the same six classrooms in the spring semester 2018, i.e. in Year 2. The analyses of the Year 1 data identify how the lessons are organized (time spent in plenary, individual work, station work, and group work), before focusing on student talk within these organizational frames making use of Segal and Lefstein’s (2015) four-level model for understanding dialogic qualities: 1) the opportunity to speak; 2) speaking one’s mind; 3) speaking on one’s own terms; and finally, 4) being acknowledged by others. The research question is: What opportunities for student talk is provided in Year one of the L1 subject?

Despite clear support of the effect of dialogical education in school (Clarke et al., 2016), the data reported in this paper suggest a paradoxical contrast between Kindergarten oracy practices and what seems to be a broadly shared understanding of Year one as directed towards silencing the students, or at least establishing the well-known IRE structure of classroom discourse (Mehan, 1979).

References
Clarke, S.N., Resnick, L.B., Penstein Rosé, C., Corno, L. & Anderman, E.M. (2016). Dialogic instruction: a new frontier. Handbook of educational psychology, 3. utg. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp 278-388.
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: how we use language to think together. London: Routledge.
Segal, A., & Lefstein, A. (2016). Exuberant voiceless participation: An unintended consequence of dialogic sensibilities? L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 16, 1–19.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. (A. Kozulin, Ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Jannet van Drie (Netherlands (the))
MOVING IDEAS. DIALOGIC INTERACTION AND WRITING IN HISTORY.
-

Paper session

Tuesday, 11:00-12:15

Room 5A29

Discussants: Rijlaarsdam (Netherlands (the))

To learn history implies learning the language of history. Both spoken and written language foster students’ ability to use discipline-based discourse and develop their thinking. Dialogic teaching is an important approach to stimulate historical reasoning in the classroom (van Boxtel & van Drie, 2016). We explore how students make use of whole–class discourse in individual writing. Although various studies have shown the importance of classroom interaction for writing (Chinn, Anderson & Waggoner, 2001), little is known about how this works. Our starting point is the Vygotskian idea that learning can move from the interpersonal level in classroom discourse to the intrapersonal level in subsequent individual writing. The research question guiding this small-scale exploratory study is: Do students draw on dialogic whole-class interaction in their subsequent writing in history, and if so, how?

Method. Pre-university students (Grade 11) followed a unit, including groupwork, whole-class interaction and argumentative writing The central question of the whole-class discussion and the writing task was: Which person/event was most significant for the development of Dutch democracy? (van Drie, van Boxtel & Stam, 2013).
The whole-class discussion was analyzed on ‘productive disciplinary engagement (Engle & Conant, 2002); here the proportion of historical reasoning by students and the teacher.
To gain insight into how students made use of the discussion in writing, we identified ideas from the document-set, the whole-class discussion and the written texts. The ideas in the student-texts were traced back; either deriving from the document-set, the whole-class discussion, or both. Analyses were conducted by two coders independently and differences were discussed. We also analyzed how students’ use of language in the discussion differed from the language-use in writing. Particularly, we looked at the use of the language of time and nominalizations, key resources for writing in history (Coffin, 2006).

Results. The discussion contained 79% historical reasoning utterances, 26% by the teacher and 53% by students. We found that almost half of the ideas in the texts could be traced back to the
discussion, but also that students developed additional ideas. We identified two ways in which students used classroom interaction in their texts: reproducing existing ideas or transforming existing ideas into new ones. Examples of both will be discussed. Students’ use of the language of history in the discussion and in writing seemed different. When writing, students used more nominalizations and the language of time was more complex.

Conclusion. First, we conclude that the whole-class discussion was dialogic since it contained high and substantive student reasoning. Second, this study showed how ideas can move from the interpersonal level in classroom interaction to the intrapersonal level in individual writing and how these ideas are transformed. Individual writing can benefit from whole-class discussion because students reproduced and transformed ideas in their writing, resulting in knowledge development. Moreover, students’ use of the language of history became more proficient. Both oral and written language use are needed to foster students’ historical reasoning. More large-scale research is needed to substantiate these findings.

References.
-Coffin, C. (2006) Historical discourse: The language of time cause and evaluation. London:
Continuum.
-Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R. C. & Waggoner, M. A. 2001). Patterns of Discourse During Two Kinds of Literature Discussion. Reading Research Quarterly 36, 378–411.
-Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction 20, 399-483.
-Van Boxtel, C., & Van Drie, J. (2017). Engaging students in historical reasoning: the need for dialogic history education. In M. Carretero, S. Berger, & M. Grever (Eds.) International Handbook of Research in Historical Culture and Education. Hybrid Ways of Learning History. pp. 573-589. Palgrave Handbooks.
-van Drie, J., van Boxtel, C., & Stam, B. (2013). “But why is this so important?” Discussing
historical significance in the classroom. International Journal of Historical Learning, Teaching and Research, 12(1), 146-168.

Fernanda L. Viana & Tânia Filipa Moniz Fernandes (Portugal)
«UNDERSTAND FOR READING, READING FOR UNDERSTANDING». THE EXPLICIT TEACHING OF ORACY AND READING COMPREHENSION
-

Paper session

Thursday, 11:00-12:15

Room 1A11

Chair: Auli,

Discussants: Rijlaarsdam (Netherlands (the))

According to the Simple View of Reading model (SVR, Gough & Tunmer, 1986), reading (R) is a product of decoding (D) and oral language (L). This multiplicative relation transmits the idea that both terms of the equation are absolutely necessary. Although affirming that this equation is false, because there is not a mathematical demonstration to prove it, Ramus (2015) considers that the SVR, in its simplicity, captures a very and reliable intuition about what it means to understand a text.
Research in the last decades has shown that the contribution of decoding and oral language for reading comprehension changes across school grades. In the early primary grades reading is very dependent on the decoding competencies. With the progress of schooling, decoding gets automatized, but the oral language competencies are more and more necessary to deal with the increased complexity of the texts.
If the research shows the growing importance of the oral language, from a didactical point of view the promotion of oracy development (comprehensive and productive) is not enough valued by teachers, namely when students are learning to read in their native language. By the entry of first grade of primary school, the basal language is acquired, but there is an enormous potential for linguistic growth (Sim-Sim, 1998).
The program “Understand for reading, reading for understanding” (CPL-LPC) is a program for the explicit teaching of comprehension in 2nd school grade. The main goals of this program are: to promote oracy and reading comprehension; to help children become aware about the linguistic and cognitive processes required at the different comprehension levels (literal, inferential, reorganization and critic).
The last goal was ambitious for children between 7-9 years old. In order to support the children in the management of the comprehension processes, a set of characters was created (Viana et al., 2010, http://hdl.handle.net/1822/11219, pp.247-254). These playful and appealing characters are: Vicente Inteligente (Intelligent Vicente) Gustavo Significado (Meaningfull Gustavo); Juvenal Literal (Literal Juvenal); Durval Inferencial (Inferential Durval); Conceição Reorganização (Reorganisation Conceição); Francisca Crítica (Critical Francisca ) and Glória Memória (Memory Glória). As can be inferred by their names, each character represents an important process of comprehension.
The program CPL-LPC consists of 29 sessions of 60 minutes each. A set of 29 texts was selected (17 for oracy and 12 for reading comprehension). The texts, of different types, were selected according to several linguistic and literary criteria. Each text was complemented with a set of tasks (namely questions) oriented towards the comprehension processes (process oriented questions).
The impact of the CPL-LPC was assessed through a quasi-experimental study (with pre and post-test) conducted with a sample of 90 children from 2nd primary grade. The differences between groups in the language and reading comprehension tests are statistically significant for the experimental group. For reading comprehension, only at the literal comprehension level no significant changes were registered. The characters created have proven to be extremely effective and motivational resources for supporting the process of meta-comprehension.
Key words: oracy, reading comprehension, program.
References
Gough, P., & Tunmer, W. (1986). Decoding, reading and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10.
Ramus, F. (2015). Alfabetização: Que habilidades estão envolvidas. Como avaliar. In J. J. Morais & J. B. A. Oliveira (Orgs.), Alfabetização. Em que consiste. Como avaliar (pp.41-59). Brasília: Instituto Alfa e Beto.
Sim-Sim, I. (1998). O desenvolvimento da linguagem. Lisboa: Universidade Aberta.
Viana, F. L. Ribeiro, I. S., Fernandes, I., Ferreira, A., Leitão, C., Gomes, S., Mendonça, S. & Pereira, L. (2010). O ensino da compreensão leitora. Da teoria à prática pedagógica. Coimbra: Almedina. Retrieved in 18 november 2017 from: http://hdl.handle.net/1822/11219

Anneke J.G.R. Wurth (Netherlands (the))
A REVIEW STUDY ON FEEDBACK AND TEACHING ORACY IN SECONDARY EDUCATION
-

Paper session

Thursday, 09:30-10:45

Room 1A11

Discussants: Min ()

Spoken language is one of the domains of L1-teaching in Dutch Secondary education. This domain focuses on presenting, arguing, discussing and debating skills. Even though this is an important domain in Dutch L1-education (Meestringa&Ravesloot, 2012), research about how to teach oracy in the Dutch L1-classrooms is still in its infancy (Bonset&Braaksma, 2008). Moreover, Baxter (2000) states that international studies hardly provide any empirical evidence on how students’ development of L1-spoken language can be supported. Yet in our experience, Dutch L1-teachers report problems with how to support the development of the oracy skills of their students. Therefore, clearer guidelines for effective oracy education seem to be needed.

A systematic literature review study has been carried out on feedback and L1-education on oracy in the context of Dutch secondary education. The goal of this review is to gain insights into how feedback can be effectively deployed in the education of L1-spoken language. The review findings should lead to criteria for effective oracy education.

A digital search of national and international scientific articles was performed, using keywords, such as oracy, speech, formative assessment and feedback. Included were peer-reviewed studies, which reported on public speaking in secondary education and were published between 1995 and 2017. The snowball method was used to search for additional, appropriate articles which didn’t come up in the first, digital search.

The results show a collection of twelve international and national research articles about the use of feedback in teaching oracy in secondary education. From these articles criteria for effective oracy education were deduced. Examples of such criteria are: let students practice regularly with (different) oral tasks to support students to gain experience and feel more confident and show examples of speakers on video and discuss their presentations with students, to support students to reflect and develop their knowledge and skills related to oral performances.

To conclude, this review study sheds light on what scientific studies report about effective L1-oral language education, with a special focus on the role of feedback. The findings provide practical information on how to make oral language education more effective.
(355 words)

Literature:
Baxter, J. (2000). Going Public: Teaching Students to Speak Out in Public Contexts. In: English in Education, Vol. 34, No. 2.

Bonset, H. en Braaksma, M. (2008). Het schoolvak Nederlands opnieuw onderzocht, Een inventarisatie van onderzoek van 1997 tot en met 2007. Enschede: SLO.

Meestringa, T. en Ravesloot, C. (2012). Het schoolexamen Nederlands op havo en vwo; verslag van een digitale enquête. Enschede: SLO.

Sooyeon Yang & Hyeseung Chung & sun young Lee & Sanghee Ryu & Byeonggon Min ()
KOREAN ADOLESCENT LANGUAGE USAGE: FOCUSING ON IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION AND POWER RELATIONSHIPS IN PEER GROUP INTERACTIONS
-

Paper session

Thursday, 13:15-14:30

Room 1A11

Discussants: van Drie (Netherlands (the))

Introduction
The purpose of this study is to review adolescents’ language and culture from the lens of social constructionism (cf., Gergen, 2009). We are particularly interested in adolescents’ use of language in relation to their identity construction and power relationships in their peer group interactions. McCarthey & Moje (2002) said that when we consider identities to be social constructions, and thus always open for change and conflict depending on the social interaction, we open possibilities for rethinking the labels we so easily use to identify students. This study could contribute to extending our understanding of the dynamic nature of identity construction and power development within adolescents’ interactions.

Research questions
1) How do the focal students position themselves and how are they positioned by interlocutors in their peer group interactions?
2) How do adolescents construct their identities and gain social power through their language use within their peer group interactions?

Methodology
This study was framed by a microethnographic approach to discourse analysis (Bloome et al., 2009). We focus on two focal students who were regarded as discourse leaders by their classmates in a sixth grade elementary classroom using Social Network Analysis. The video files of the peer group interactions were analyzed to identify key events and trace how power relationship and identity positioning were expressed, conflicted, challenged, and co-constructed in their peer group discussions. The interviews with the students were analyzed in order to enrich and triangulate the analysis of the key video recorded events.

Findings
The major findings of this study are as follows. An examination of the adolescents’ peer group interactions reveals that group solidarity is an important issue for adolescents as social beings. They often used specific expressions in order to identify and construct group solidarity. For example, their use of slang is a strategic method for unity, group identity, and power development within the group, not merely a means of expressing unpleasant emotions. In addition, different aspects of language usage appeared depending on gender in peer group discussions. The male focal student who was regarded as a discourse leader tended to lead a competitive dialogue mainly with humor, which was the dominant way of speaking for male students in the classroom. On the other hand, the female focal student who was also regarded as another discourse leader tended to use more empathic and modest language, which was the predominant method of speaking among female students in the classroom. The two focal students led their peers’ ways of speaking and constructing their leader identity and social power within their peer groups.

Key words: adolescents’ language use, identity construction, power relationship

References
Bloome, D., Carter, S., Christian, B., Otto, S., Shuart-Faris, N., Smith, M., & Madrid, S. with contributions by S. Goldman & D. Macbeth. (2009). On discourse analysis: Approaches to language and literacy research. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gergen, K. (2009). Invitation to social constructionism. (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
McCarthery, S. J., & Moje, E. (2002). Identity matters. Reading research quarterly, 37(2), 228-238.