The floor is yours
Willemsen, Annerose
DOI:
10.33612/diss.99870715
IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from
it. Please check the document version below.
Document Version
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Publication date:
2019
Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database
Citation for published version (APA):
Willemsen, A. (2019). The floor is yours: a conversation analytic study of teachers’ conduct facilitating
whole-class discussions around texts. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. https://doi.org/10.33612/diss.99870715
Copyright
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).
Take-down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.
Antaki, C. (2011). Six Kinds of Applied Conversation Analysis. In C. Antaki (ed.), Applied
Conversation Analysis (pp. 1–14). https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230316874_1
Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school english. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 685–730. Avery, P. G., Levy, S. A., & Simmons, A. M. M. (2013). Deliberating controversial public issues as
part of civic education. The Social Studies, 104(3), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/0037 7996.2012.691571
Bargh, J. A., & Schul, Y. (1980). On the cognitive benefits of teaching. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 72(5), 593–604. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.72.5.593
Beach, W. A. (1995). Conversation Analysis: ‘Okay’ as a clue for understanding consequentiality. In S. J. Sigman (ed.), The consequentiality of communication (pp. 121–161). hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence erlbaum.
Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2001). Inviting students into the pursuit of meaning. Educational
Psychology Review, 13(3), 225–241. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016671722022
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., Sandora, C., Kucan, L., & Worthy, J. (1996). Questioning the Author: A yearlong classroom implementation to engage students with text. The Elementary
School Journal, 96(4), 385–414.
Björk-Willén, P., & Cekaite, A. (2017, July). Multimodality and affectivity in adults’ storytelling for
children. Paper presented at the 15th International Pragmatics Conference (IPrA2017),
Belfast.
Button, G., & Casey, N. (1984). Generating topic: The use of topic initial elicitors. In J. M. Atkinson & J. heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 167– 190). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Calderhead, J. (1981). Stimulated recall: A method for research on teaching. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 51(2), 211–217. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1981.tb02474.x
Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (1st ed.). Portsmouth, Nh: heinemann educational books, inc.
Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815–843. https://doi. org/10.1002/tea.20171
Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R. C., & Waggoner, M. A. (2001). Patterns of discourse in two kinds of literature discussion. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 378–411. https://doi.org/10.1598/ RRQ.36.4.3
Chinn, C. A., O’donnell, A. M., & Jinks, T. S. (2000). The Structure of Discourse in Collaborative Learning. The Journal of Experimental Education, 69(1), 77–97. https://doi. org/10.1080/00220970009600650
Damhuis, R., De Blauw, A., & Brandenbarg, N. (2004). CombiList, een instrument voor
taalontwikkeling via interactie: praktische vaardigheden voor leidsters en leerkrachten.
Nijmegen: expertisecentrum Nederlands.
Damhuis, R., & Tammes, A.-C. (2018). Werken aan taaldenkgesprekken in W&T: een didactisch model voor pabostudenten en leerkrachten. Tijdschrift Taal, 9(13), 22–27.
Damhuis, R., Vonk, A., Tammes, A.-C., & Postma, G. (2013). Taal, denken en geschiedenis: historisch redeneren met kinderen op de basisschool. KEIO voor docenten geschiedenis
en staatsinrichting, 54, 4–9.
Dillon, J. T. (1985). Using questions to foil discussion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 1(2), 109– 121. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(85)90010-1
englert, C. (2010). Questions and responses in Dutch conversations. Journal of Pragmatics,
42(10), 2666–2684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.005
evans, J. (2001). ‘Five little dollies jumping on the bed’ - Learning about mathematics through talk. In P. Goodwin (ed.), The Articulate Classroom: Talking and Learning in the Primary
School (pp. 69–76). London, UK: David Fulton Publishers Ltd.
Fasel Lauzon, V., & Berger, e. (2015). The multimodal organization of speaker selection in classroom interaction. Linguistics and Education, 31, 14–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. linged.2015.05.001
Forman, e. A., Ramirez-DelToro, V., Brown, L., & Passmore, C. (2017). Discursive strategies that foster an epistemic community for argument in a biology classroom. Learning and
Instruction, 48, 32–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.08.005
Gernsbacher, M. A., & Kaschak, M. P. (2013). Text comprehension. In D. Reisberg (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1093/ oxfordhb/9780195376746.013.0029
Glenn, P. (2003). Laughter in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goffman, e. (1981a). Footing. In Forms of talk (pp. 124–159). Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publisher. Goffman, e. (1981b). Forms of talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publisher.
Goffman, e. (1981c). Response cries. In Forms of talk (pp. 78–123). Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publisher.
Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational Organization: Interaction Between Speakers and Hearers. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. h. (2004). Participation. In A. Duranti (ed.), A Companion to Linguistic
Anthropology (pp. 222–244). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Goodwin, M. h. (1980). Processes of mutual monitoring implicated in the production of description sequences. Sociological Inquiry, 50(3–4), 303–317. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1475-682X.1980.tb00024.x
Gosen, M. N., Berenst, J., & De Glopper, K. (2013). The interactional structure of explanations during shared reading at kindergarten. International Journal of Educational Research, 62, 62–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.06.006
Gosen, M. N. (2012). Tracing learning in interaction: An analysis of shared reading of picture books
at kindergarten. University of Groningen, Groningen.
Gosen, M. N., Berenst, J., & De Glopper, K. (2009). Participeren tijdens het voorlezen van prentenboeken in de kleuterklas: een pilot-study. Toegepaste Taalwetenschap in Artikelen,
81, 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1075/ttwia.81.06gos
Gosen, M. N., Berenst, J., & De Glopper, K. (2015). Shared reading at kindergarten: Understanding book content through participation. Pragmatics and Society, 6(3), 367–397. https://doi. org/10.1075/ps.6.3.03gos
Gosen, M. N., & Koole, T. (2017). Conversation Analysis. In D. Wyse, N. Selwyn, e. Smith, & L. e. Suter (eds.), The BERA/SAGE Handbook of Educational Research (Vol. 2, pp. 791–811). London: SAGe Publications Inc.
haldimann, N., hauser, S., & Nell-Tuor, N. (2017). Aspekte multimodaler Unterrichtskommunikation am Beispiel des Klassenrats - Partizipationsformen und ihre medialen und räumlichen Ausprägungen. Leseforum.ch, (1), 1–17.
hargreaves, L., Moyles, J., Merry, R., Paterson, F., Pell, A., & esarte-Sarries, V. (2003). how do primary school teachers define and implement ‘interactive teaching’ in the National Literacy Strategy in england? Research Papers in Education, 18(3), 217–236. https://doi. org/10.1080/0267152032000107301
hayes, J. R., Flower, L., Schriver, K. A., Stratman, J. F., & Carey, L. (1987). Cognitive processes in revision. In S. Rosenberg (ed.), Reading, Writing, and Language processes (pp. 176–240). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
heath, C. (1984). Talk and recipiency: sequential organization in speech and body movement. In J. M. Atkinson & J. heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action (pp. 247–265). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
heritage, J. (1984). Conversation Analysis. In J. heritage, Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology (pp. 233–292). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
heritage, J. (2010). Questioning in medicine. In A. Freed & S. ehrlich (eds.), Why Do You
Ask?: The function of questions in institutional discourse. https://doi.org/10.1093/
acprof:oso/9780195306897.003.0003
heritage, J. (2012). The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge.
Research on Language & Social Interaction, 45(1), 30–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/0835181
3.2012.646685
heritage, J. (2013). epistemics in conversation. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (eds.), The Handbook of
Conversation Analysis (pp. 370–394). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch18
hess, D., & Avery, P. G. (2008). Discussion of controversial issues as a form and goal of democratic education. In J. Arthur, I. Davies, & C. hahn (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Education for
Citizenship and Democracy (pp. 506–518). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849200486
hoey, e. M. (2018). Drinking for speaking: The multimodal organization of drinking in conversation. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 1(1). https://doi. org/10.7146/si.v1i1.105498
houen, S., Danby, S., Farrell, A., & Thorpe, K. (2018). Adopting an unknowing stance in teacher– child interactions through ‘I wonder…’ formulations. Classroom Discourse, 1–17. https:// doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2018.1518251
howe, C., & Abedin, M. (2013). Classroom dialogue: a systematic review across four decades of research. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(3), 325–356. https://doi. org/10.1080/0305764X.2013.786024
hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (1998). Conversation Analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge, UK: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Ingram, J., Andrews, N., & Pitt, A. (2018). Making Student explanations Relevant in Whole Class Discussion. In J. N. Moschkovich, D. Wagner, A. Bose, J. Rodrigues Mendes, & M. Schütte (eds.), Language and Communication in Mathematics Education (pp. 51–63). https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-319-75055-2_5
Jefferson, G. (1984). Notes on a systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens “Yeah”; and “Mm hm”; Paper in Linguistics, 17(2), 197–216. https://doi. org/10.1080/08351818409389201
Jefferson, G. (1986). Notes on ‘latency’ in overlap onset. Human Studies, 9, 153–183. https://doi. org/10.1007/BF00148125
Kendon, A. (1967). Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction. Acta Psychologica,
26(1), 22–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(67)90005-4
Kendon, A. (2004). Two gesture families of the open hand. In Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance (pp. 248–283). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807572.013
Kidd, D. C., & Castano, e. (2013). Reading literary fiction improves Theory of Mind. Science,
342(6156), 377–380. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1239918
Koole, T. (2010). Displays of epistemic access: Student responses to teacher explanations.
Research on Language & Social Interaction, 43(2), 183–209. https://doi.
org/10.1080/08351811003737846
Koole, T. (2015). Classroom interaction. In K. Tracy, C. Ilie, & T. Sandel (eds.), The International
Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118611463.
wbielsi092
Koole, T., & Berenst, J. (2008). Pupil participation in plenary interaction. In J. Deen, M. hajer, & T. Koole (eds.), Interaction in two multicultural mathematics classrooms: Mechanisms of
inclusion and exclusion (pp. 107–139). Amsterdam: Aksant Academic Publishers.
Koshik, I. (2002). Designedly incomplete utterances: A pedagogical practice for eliciting knowledge displays in error correction sequences. Research on Language and Social
Interaction, 35(3), 277–309. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3503_2
Kwant, L. P. (2011). Effecten van het gebruik van prentenboeken op de sociaal-economische
ontwikkeling van kleuters (University of Groningen). Retrieved from https://www.
rug.nl/research/portal/publications/effecten-van-het-gebruik-van-prentenboeken- op-de-sociaaleconomische-ontwikkeling-van-kleuters(cf5203dc-c17b-4c8b-83cf-fc37a6b3374e).html
Lamerichs, J., & Te Molder, h. (2011). Reflecting on your own talk: The Discursive Action Method at work. In C. Antaki (ed.), Applied Conversation Analysis (pp. 184–206). https://doi. org/10.1057/9780230316874_10
Lee, Y.-A. (2007). Third turn position in teacher talk: Contingency and the work of teaching.
Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 180–206.
Levinson, S. C. (2013). Action formation and action ascription. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (eds.), The
Handbook of Conversation Analysis (pp. 103–130). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Littleton, K., Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., Rowe, D., & Sams, C. (2005). Talking and thinking together at Key Stage 1. Early Years, 25, 167–182. https://doi. org/10.1080/09575140500128129
Lyle, S. (2008). Dialogic teaching: Discussing theoretical contexts and reviewing evidence from classroom practice. Language and Education, 22, 222–240. https://doi. org/10.1080/09500780802152499
Margutti, P. (2010). On Designedly Incomplete Utterances: What counts as learning for teachers and students in primary classroom interaction. Research on Language & Social Interaction,
Margutti, P., & Drew, P. (2014). Positive evaluation of student answers in classroom instruction.
Language and Education, 28, 436–458. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2014.898650
Maynard, D. W. (2013). everyone and no one to turn to: Intellectual roots and contexts for Conversation Analysis. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (eds.), The Handbook of Conversation
Analysis (pp. 11–31). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch4
Mazeland, h. (1983). Sprecherwechsel in der Schule. In K. ehlich & J. Rehbein (eds.),
Kommunikation in Schule und Hochschule: Linguistische und ethnomethodologische Analysen (pp. 77-101). Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
Mazeland, h. (2008). Inleiding in de conversatieanalyse. Bussum: Coutinho.
Mazeland, h. (2016). The positionally-sensitive workings of the Dutch particle nou. In P. Auer & Y. Maschler (eds.), NU / NÅ, A family of discourse markers across the languages of europe
and beyond (pp. 377–408). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110348989
Mchoul, A. (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society,
7(2), 183–213.
McKeown, M. G., & Beck, I. L. (1999). Getting the Discussion Started. Educational Leadership,
57(3), 25–28.
McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., & Blake, R. G. K. (2009). Rethinking reading comprehension instruction: A comparison of instruction for strategies and content approaches. Reading
Research Quarterly, 44(3), 218–253. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.44.3.1
McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., & Worthy, M. J. (1993). Grappling with Text Ideas: Questioning the Author. The Reading Teacher, 46(7), 560–566.
Mehan, h. (1979a). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge; Massachusetts; London: harvard University Press.
Mehan, h. (1979b). ‘What time is it, Denise?’: Asking known information questions in classroom discourse. Theory Into Practice, 18(4), 285–294.
Mehan, h., & Cazden, C. B. (2013, May). The study of classroom discourse: Early history and
current developments. Paper presented at the AeRA 2013 Annual Meeting, San
Fransisco, CA. Retrieved from eds198hs.weebly.com/uploads/7/8/5/4/7854190/mehan-cazdenaera2013.docx
Mercer, N. (1995). The Guided Construction of Knowledge: Talk Amongst Teachers and Learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters LTD.
Mercer, N. (2000). Words & Minds: How we use language to think together. London: Routledge. Michaels, S., & O’Connor, C. (2015). Conceptualizing Talk Moves as Tools: Professional
Development Approaches for Academically Productive Discussions. In L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (eds.), Socializing Intelligence Through Academic Talk and
Dialogue (pp. 347–361). https://doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-43-1_27
Mondada, L. (2016, July). Conventions for multimodal transcription. Retrieved from https:// franzoesistik.philhist.unibas.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/franzoesistik/mondada_ multimodal_conventions.pdf
Mortensen, K. (2008). Selecting next speaker in the second language classroom: how to find a willing next speaker in planned activities. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(1), 55–79. https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.v5il.55
Müller, C. (2004). Forms and functions of the Palm Up Open hand: A case of gesture family? In C. Müller & R. Posner (eds.), The semantics and pragmatics of everyday gestures (pp. 233–256). Berlin: Weidler.
Murphy, P. K., Wilkinson, I. A. G., Soter, A. O., hennessey, M. N., & Alexander, J. F. (2009). examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: A meta-analysis.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 740–764. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015576
Myhill, D. (2006). Talk, talk, talk: Teaching and learning in whole class discourse. Research Papers
in Education, 21(1), 19–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671520500445425
Nystrand, M. (1997). Dialogic instruction: When recitation becomes conversation. In M. Nystrand, Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the
English classroom. (pp. 1–29). New York/London: Teachers College Press.
Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (1991). Instructional Discourse, Student engagement, and Literature Achievement. Research in the Teaching of English, 25(3), 261–290. Retrieved from JSTOR.
Nystrand, M., Wu, L. L., Gamoran, A., Zeiser, S., & Long, D. A. (2003). Questions in time: Investigating the structure and dynamics of unfolding classroom discourse. Discourse
Processes, 35(2), 135–198. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326950DP3502_3
O’Donnell, A. M. (2006). The role of peers and group learning. In P. A. Alexander & P. h. Winne (eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (second) (pp. 781-802). https://doi. org/10.4324/9780203874790.ch34
Parker, W. C., & hess, D. (2001). Teaching with and for discussion. Teaching and Teacher Education,
17(3), 273–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00057-3
Peräkylä, A., & Vehviläinen, S. (2003). Conversation Analysis and the professional stocks of interactional knowledge. Discourse & Society, 14(6), 727–750. https://doi. org/10.1177/09579265030146003
Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/ dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action (pp. 57–101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Quasthoff, U., heller, V., & Morek, M. (2017). On the sequential organization and genre-orientation of discourse units in interaction: An analytic framework. Discourse Studies,
19(1), 84–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445616683596
Rapley, M., & Antaki, C. (1998). ‘What do you think about...?’: Generating views in an interview.
Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 18(4), 587–608. https://doi.
org/10.1515/text.1.1998.18.4.587
Raymond, C. W., & Stivers, T. (2016). The omnirelevance of accountability: Off-record account sollicitations. In J. D. Robinson (ed.), Accountability in Social Interaction (pp. 321–353). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Raymond, G. (2003). Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding. American Sociological Review, 68(6), 939. https://doi.org/10.2307/1519752 Reznitskaya, A., Anderson, R. C., McNurlen, B., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., Archodidou, A., & Kim, S.
(2001). Influence of oral discussion on written argument. Discourse Processes, 32(2–3), 155–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2001.9651596
Reznitskaya, A., Kuo, L.-J., Clark, A.-M., Miller, B., Jadallah, M., Anderson, R. C., & Nguyen‐Jahiel, K. (2009). Collaborative reasoning: A dialogic approach to group discussions. Cambridge
Journal of Education, 39(1), 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640802701952
Ross, J. A. (1995). Students explaining solutions in student-directed groups: Cooperative learning and reform in mathematics education. School Science and Mathematics, 95(8), 411–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1995.tb10194.x
Ross, J. A. (2008). explanation giving and receiving in cooperative learning groups. In R. M. Gillies, A. F. Ashman, & J. Terwel (eds.), The teacher’s role in implementing cooperative
learning in the classroom (pp. 222–237). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-70892-8_11
Ross, J. A., & Cousins, J. B. (1995). Impact of explanation seeking on student achievement and attitudes. The Journal of Educational Research, 89(2), 109–117.
Rusk, F., Sahlström, F., & Pörn, M. (2017). Initiating and carrying out L2 instruction by asking known-answer questions: Incongruent interrogative practices in bi- and multilingual peer interaction. Linguistics and Education, 38, 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. linged.2017.02.004
Sacks, h. (1992). Lectures on conversation (G. Jefferson, ed.). Oxford, UK ; Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell.
Sacks, h., Schegloff, e. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696. https://doi.org/10.2307/412243 Sahlström, F. (2001). The interactional organization of hand raising in classroom interaction.
Journal of Classroom Interaction, 37(2), 47–57.
Schegloff, e. A. (1972). Notes on a conversational practice: Formulating place. In D. N. Sudnow (ed.), Studies in social interaction (pp. 75–119). New York: MacMillan, The free press. Schegloff, e. A. (1984). On some questions and ambiguities in conversation. In J. Maxwell
Atkinson & J. heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action (pp. 266–298). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, e. A. (1987). Between micro and macro: Contexts and other connections. In J. C. Alexander, B. Giesen, R. Munch, & N. J. Smelser (eds.), The micro-macro link (pp. 207–234). Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Schegloff, e. A. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97(5), 1295–1345. https:// doi.org/10.1086/229903
Schegloff, e. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: Volume 1: A Primer in Conversation
Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, e. A., & Sacks, h. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8(4), 289–327. https://doi. org/10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289
Schuitema, J., Radstake, h., Van de Pol, J., & Veugelers, W. (2018). Guiding classroom discussions for democratic citizenship education. Educational Studies, 44(4), 377–407. https://doi.org /10.1080/03055698.2017.1373629
Schuitema, J., Radstake, h., & Veugelers, W. (2011). Docenten en de actieve participatie van
leerlingen in de klassikale discussie. Amsterdam: Department of Child education,
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20131 Searle, J. R. (1969). The structure of illocutionary acts. In J. R. Searle, Speech Acts: An essay in the
philosophy of language (pp. 54–71). Retrieved from doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139173438.006
Shepherd, M. A. (2013). Critical discourse analysis of synchronic and diachronic variation in institutional turn-allocation. LSA Annual Meeting Extended Abstracts, 4, 42. https://doi. org/10.3765/exabs.v0i0.768
Shepherd, M. A. (2014). The discursive construction of knowledge and equity in classroom interactions. Linguistics and Education, Complete(28), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. linged.2014.08.006
Sidnell, J. (2013). Basic Conversation Analytic methods. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (eds.), The
Handbook of Conversation Analysis (pp. 77–100). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.
ch4
Sidnell, J., & Stivers, T. (eds.). (2013). The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. https://doi. org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch4
Sinclair, J. M., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers
and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
Sliedrecht, K. Y., & Van Charldorp, T. (2011). Tussen spraak en schrift: de rol van samenvattingen in het politieverhoor. Tijdschrift Voor Taalbeheersing, 33(1), 34–55. https://doi.org/10.5117/ TVT2011.1.TUSS395
Solem, M. S. (2016). Negotiating knowledge claims: Students’ assertions in classroom interactions. Discourse Studies, 18(6), 737–757. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445616668072 Soter, A. O., Wilkinson, I. A., Murphy, P. K., Rudge, L., Reninger, K., & edwards, M. N. (2008). What
the discourse tells us: Talk and indicators of high-level comprehension. International
Journal of Educational Research, 47(6), 372–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2009.01.001
Stanovich, K. e. (2008). Matthew effects in Reading: Some Consequences of Individual Differences in the Acquisition of Literacy. The Journal of Education, 189(1/2), 23–55. Retrieved from JSTOR.
Sterponi, L. (2007). Clandestine interactional reading: Intertextuality and double-voicing under the desk. Linguistics and Education, 18(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. linged.2007.04.001
Stivers, T., & Rossano, F. (2010). Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction,
43(1), 3–31.
Stokoe, e. (2014). The Conversation Analytic Role-play Method (CARM): A method for training communication skills as an alternative to simulated role-play. Research on Language and
Social Interaction, 47(3), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2014.925663
Tammes, A.-C., Vonk, A., Van der Zalm, e., & Damhuis, R. (2015). Meer kennis, meer inzicht, meer taal: Taaldenkgesprekken maken taal- en zaakvaklessen uitdagend. MeerTaal, 2(3), 4–9. Taylor, I., & Olson, D. R. (eds.). (1995). Scripts and Literacy: Reading and Learning to Read Alphabets,
Syllabaries, and Characters. Springer Science & Business Media.
Ten have, P. (2007). Doing Conversation Analysis. London: SAGe Publications Ltd.
Van den Branden, K. (2019). Iedereen taalcompetent in de 21e eeuw? Drie uitdagingen voor het primair onderwijs. MeerTaal, 6(3), 4–8.
Van den heuvel-Panhuizen, M., elia, I., & Robitzsch, A. (2016). effects of reading picture books on kindergartners’ mathematics performance. Educational Psychology, 36(2), 323–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2014.963029
Van der Pol, C. (2010). Prentenboeken lezen als literatuur. Delft: eburon.
Van der Veen, C., De Mey, L., Van Kruistum, C., & Van Oers, B. (2017). The effect of productive classroom talk and metacommunication on young children’s oral communicative competence and subject matter knowledge: An intervention study in early childhood education. Learning and Instruction, 48, 14–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. learninstruc.2016.06.001
Van der Veen, C., Van der Wilt, F., Van Kruistum, C., Van Oers, B., & Michaels, S. (2017). MODeL2TALK: An intervention to promote productive classroom talk. The Reading
Teacher, 70(6), 689–700. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1573
Van der Veen, C., Van Kruistum, C., & Michaels, S. (2015). Productive classroom dialogue as an activity of shared thinking and communicating: A commentary on Marsal. Mind, Culture,
and Activity, 22(4), 320–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2015.1071398
Van Leeuwen, A., & Janssen, J. (2019). A systematic review of teacher guidance during collaborative learning in primary and secondary education. Educational Research Review,
27, 71–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.02.001
Van Lier, L. (1988). The Classroom and the Language Learner. London: Longman.
Vanbuel, M., Boderé, A., & Van den Branden, K. (2017). Helpen taalbeleid en taalscreening
taalgrenzen verleggen? Een reviewstudie naar effectieve taalstimuleringsmaatregelen.
Leuven: Steunpunt SONO.
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and Language (A. Kozulin, ed.). Cambrigde, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Webb, N. M. (1991). Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in small groups.
Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 366. https://doi.org/10.2307/749186
Webb, N. M. (1992). Testing a theoretical model of student interaction and learning in small groups. In R. hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups:
The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 102–119). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Webb, N. M. (2009). The teacher’s role in promoting collaborative dialogue in the classroom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 1–28. https://doi. org/10.1348/000709908X380772
Webb, N. M., Farivar, S. h., & Mastergeorge, A. M. (2002). Productive helping in cooperative groups. Theory Into Practice, 41(1), 13–20.
Webb, N. M., & Palincsar, A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 841–873). New York: Macmillan. Willemsen, A., Gosen, M. N., Koole, T., & De Glopper, K. (2019a). Asking for more: Teachers’
invitations for elaboration in whole-class discussions. Manuscript submitted for
publication.
Willemsen, A., Gosen, M. N., Koole, T., & De Glopper, K. (2019b). Teachers’ pass-on practices in whole-class discussions: how teachers return the floor to their students. Classroom
Willemsen, A., Gosen, M. N., Van Braak, M., Koole, T., & De Glopper, K. (2018). Teachers’ open invitations in whole-class discussions. Linguistics and Education, 45, 40–49. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.linged.2018.03.001
Wunderlich, D. (1975). Zur Konventionalität von Sprechhandlungen. In D. Wunderlich (ed.),
