Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Pay, Bradley (2016)
Publisher: Teacher Education Advancement Network (TEAN), University of Cumbria
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Z482, Z484
Talk in the classroom has been one of the most talked about topics in the classroom over recent years. For years, many have felt excessive teacher-pupil talk has been the best source to pupil progress however many are starting to feel pupil-pupil talk has greater benefits to progress. This investigation looked at the effect of pupil-pupil talk and whether a Thinking Together Programme was more or less effective than excessive teacher-pupil talk on pupil progress in five GCSE PE theory lessons. Analysis found that when pupil-pupil talk increased and teacher-pupil talk decreased, engagement, behaviour and decision-making enhanced. However, of work that is of greater difficulty, it was alternatively found that excessive teacher-pupil talk was necessary because teachers could support and guide pupils in the correct direction.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Alexander, R. J. (2005). Towards dialogic teaching: rethinking classroom talk. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Dialogos. 56 - 70.
    • Alexander, R. (2008). Towards Dialogic Teaching. London: Routledge. 14.
    • Alexander, R. (2009) Children, Their world, Their Education: Final Report and Recommendations of the Cambridge Primary Review. London: Routledge. 27.
    • Bandura, A (1977). Social Learning Theory. New York: General Learning Press. 1 - 47 Bruner, J. (1996). Teaching the Present, Past and Possible. In: Bruner, J. The Culture of Education. London, England: Harvard University Press. 92 - 97.
    • Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: the language of teaching and learning. 2nd edition. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
    • Dawes, L. (2015). The Importance of Speaking and Listening. Available: http://oer.educ.cam.ac.uk/wiki/The_Importance_of_Speaking_and_Listening. Last accessed 24/03/2016.
    • De la Luz, G. & Pulido, A. (2014). Teachers Talk and Chalk Vs Students Talk and Sho. Available: http://filosofia.uanl.mx:8080/ixcoloquio/public/uploads/2c8860864d1bd86f2b868ad0d6edd8 65.pdf. Last accessed 23/03/2016.
    • Department for Education. (2011: A). The Framework for the National Curriculum: A report by the Expert Panel for the National Curriculum review. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/175439/NC R-Expert_Panel_Report.pdf. Last accessed 22/03/2016.
    • Department for Education. (2011: B). Teaching Standards. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/301107/Tea chers__Standards.pdf. Last accessed 08/04/2016
    • Department for Education. (2012). Not enough physical in physical education. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/not-enough-physical-in-physical-education. Last accessed: 21/03/2016.
    • Edwards, D. & Mercer, N. (1987). Common Knowledge and the Development of Understanding in the Classroom. 1st Edition. London: Routledge. 142 - 146.
    • Edwards, A. D. & Westgate, D. (1994). Investigating classroom talk. 2nd edition. London: Falmer.
    • Farahian, M. & Rezaee, M. (2012). A case study of an EFL teacher's types of questions: An investigation into classroom interaction. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences Journal. 161- 167.
    • Fisher, D., Frey, N. & Rothenberg, C. (2008:A). Chapter 1. In: Rothenberg, C Content-Area Conversations: How to Plan Discussion-Based Lessons for Diverse Language Learners. London: ASCD books. 12 - 19.
    • Fisher, D., Frey, N. & and Rothenberg, C. (2008:B). Chapter 5. Procedures for Classroom Talk. In: Fisher, D. Content-Area Conversations: How to Plan Discussion-Based Lessons for Diverse Language Learners. London: ASCD Books. 79 - 90.
    • Flanders, N. (1970). Analysing Teacher Behaviour. Reading, M.A: Addison-Wesley. London. 21-33.
    • Frean, A. (2009). Pupils to be taught to speak properly amid growing od poverty. The Sunday Times, 27 April. Available from:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article6174865.ece. Last accessed: 26/03/2016.
    • Gall, C. (2009). The words in the mental cupboard. BBC Magazine, 28 April. Available from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8013859.stm. Last accessed: 24/03/2016.
    • Gove, M. (2012). The importance of teaching. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/michael-gove-speaks-about-the-importance-ofteaching. Last accessed 01/04/2016
    • Hogan, R., Natasi, B. & Pressley, M. (2000). Discourse Patterns and Collaborative Scientific reasoning in peer and teacher guided classrooms. Cognition and Instruction. 77. 379 - 432.
    • Huxley, A. (1958). BRAVE NEW WORLD REVISITED. Available: http://www.huxley.net/bnw-revisited/. Last accessed 01/04/2016.
    • Keshe, '., Waik, P., Mee, N. & “taaa, J. . Pia hildes aageet of theseles ad othes i ollaoatie goup ok: “oe ties it takes patiee… Education 3-13: International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education.2(2). 21 - 40.
    • Lefstein, A. & Snell, J. (2011). CLASSROOM DISCOURSE: THE PROMISE AND COMPLEXITY OF DIALOGIC PRACTICE. In: Ellis, S., McCartney, E. & J. Bourne Applied Linguistics and Primary School Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 165 - 185.
    • Littleton, K., Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., Rowe, D. & Sams, C. (2005). Talking and Thinking Together at Key Stage 1. Early Years: An international Journal of Research and Development. 10(1). 21 - 40.
    • Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. 1 - 22.
    • Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge: talk among teachers and learners. Clevedon, England. Multilingual Matters Ltd. 120 - 125.
    • Mercer, N. (2004). About Thinking Together. Available: https://thinkingtogether.educ.cam.ac.uk/about/ . Last accessed 15/03/2016.
    • Mercer, N. (2015). Group Talk - Benefits for Science Teaching. Available: http://oer.educ.cam.ac.uk/wiki/Group_Talk_-_Benefits_for_Science_Teaching. Last accessed 27/03/2016.
    • Mee, N. & Wegeif, '. . Childes Talk ad t he Deelopet of 'easoig i the Classroom. British Educational Research Journal. 25(1). 95 - 111.
    • Mercer, N., Wegerif, R. and Dawes, L. (1999) 'Children's talk and the development of reasoning in the classroom', British Educational Research Journal. 25. 1. 95-111.
    • Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: ways of helping children to use language to learn science. British Educational Research Journal. 30. 3. 367-385.
    • Myhill, D., Jones, S. & Hopper, R. (2006) Talking, listening learning: effective talk in the primary classroom. Open University Press. Maidenhead. 1 - 19.
    • Nelson, G. (2009). Classroom talk: co-ostutig a diffiult studet. Educational research. 51(4). 439 - 454.
    • Nunan, D. & Bailey, K. M. (2009). Exploring second language classroom research: A comprehensible guide. Boston: Heinle, Cengage Learning. 1 - 67.
    • Paton, G. (2014). Ofsted penalising schools oer chalk and talk teachi ng. Available: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educaationnews/10973572/Ofsted-penalisingschools-over-chalk-and-talk-teaching.html. Last accessed: 21/03/2016.
    • Rojas-Drummond, S., Fernandez-Cardenas, F., Mercer, N. & Wegerif, R. (2001). Re-conceptualizing “affoldig ad the )oe of Poial Deelopet i the otet of setial collaborative learning. Journal of Classroom Interaction. 36(1). 40 - 54.
    • Scott, P. (1998). Teacher talk in science classrooms: a Vygotskian analysis review. Studies in Science education. 32. 45 - 80.
    • Scott, P. H., Mortimer, E. F. & Aguiar, O. G. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90(4), 605-631.
    • Sinclair, J. & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: the English used by teachers and pupils. 1st edition. Oxford University Press: London.
    • Smith, F., Hardman, F., Wall, K. & Mroz, M. (2004). Interactive whole class teaching in the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies. British Educational Research Journal. 30(3). 295 - 411.
    • Stewart, W. (2014). Pedagogy - 'Disillusioned' teachers bored by chalk and talk. Available: https://www.tes.com/article.aspx?storycode=6395637. Last accessed 23/03/2016 Tobin, K. and Gallagher, J. J. (1987). Teacher management and student engagement in high school science. Science Education, 71, 535-556.
    • Van Den Akker, J. (1998). The science curriculum: Between ideals and outcomes. International Handbook of Science Education. 42(4). 421-447.
    • a Lie, L. Costaits ad esoues i lasso o talk: Issues of eualit ad set. Journal of Education. 72(1). 90-107.
    • Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society; the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge. Mars: Harvard University Press.
    • Walsh, S. (2002). Construction or obstruction: teacher talk and learner involvement in the EFL classrooms. Language Teaching Research: Sage Publication. 6(1). 3-23.
    • Walsh, S. (2011). Exploring classroom discourse: Language in action. London: Routledge. 1 - 48.
    • Wilson, J. . Usig ods aout thikig: otet aalsis o f heist teahes lassoo talk. International Journal of Science education. 27. 1064 - 1084.
    • Zare-Behtash, E. & Azarnia, T. (2015). A case study of teacher talk time and student talk time in an Iranian language school. International journal of English language, literature and translation studies 2 (3), 274 - 285.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article