Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T09:02:25.561Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The relevance of repair for classroom correction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 October 2006

DOUGLAS MACBETH
DOUGLAS MACBETH
Affiliation:
School of Educational Policy & Leadership, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, macbeth.1@osu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article attempts to align a familiar task of classroom teaching, eliciting from students correct answers about their lessons, with a major organizational domain in studies of natural conversation, that of conversational repair. Numerous studies have analyzed correction sequences in classroom discourse, and our discussion pays special attention to McHoul's (1990) treatment of “repair in classroom talk.” McHoul directly measures the findings on repair in studies of natural conversation to the regularities of correction sequences in classroom lessons. It is argued, contra McHoul, that repair is a different, and prior, order of discursive work, and one that premises the very possibility of classroom correction. Further, the difference may have wider relevance for understanding repair and correction as “co-operating” organizations of talk-in-interaction more generally.

Keywords

Conversation analysisclassroom discoursecorrectionethnomethodologyrepair.
Type
Research Article
Information
Language in Society , Volume 33 , Issue 5 , November 2004 , pp. 703 - 736
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Au, Kathryn, & Kawakami, Alice (1994). Cultural congruence in instruction. In E. Hollins et al. (eds.), Teaching diverse populations, 5–24. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Bateson, Gregory, & Mead, Margaret (1942). Balinese character. New York Academy of Sciences.
Bellack, A.; Kliebard, H. K.; Hyman, R.T.; & Smith, F. L., Jr. (1966). The language of the classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
Billig, Michael (1999). Whose terms? Whose ordinariness? Rhetoric and ideology in conversation analysis. Discourse & Society 10:543–58.Google Scholar
Bloome, David; Puro, Pamela; & Theodorou, Ernie (1989). Procedural display and classroom lessons. Curriculum Inquiry 19:265–91.Google Scholar
Brown, John; Collins, Allan; & Duguid, Paul (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher 18:32–42.Google Scholar
Bruner, Jerome (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cazden, Courtney (1988). Classroom discourse: The learning of teaching and learning. London: Heinmann Educational Books.
Chaiklin, Seth, & Lave, Jean (1993). Understanding practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Cook-Gumperz, Jenny (1986). The social construction of literacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davidson, Judy (1984). Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests, and proposals dealing with potential or actual rejection. In J. M. Atkinson & J. C. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action, 102–28. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Drew, Paul (1981). Adults' corrections of children's mistakes. In French & Maclure, 244–67.
Erickson, Frederick (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (ed.), Handbook of research on teaching, 3rd ed., 119–61. New York: Macmillan.
Fairclough, Norman (1995). Critical discourse analysis. London: Longman.
French, Peter, & Maclure, Margaret (1981). Adult–child conversation. New York: St. Martins.
Garfinkel, Harold (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Garfinkel, Harold, & Sacks, Harvey (1970). The formal properties of practical action. In J. McKinney & E. A. Tiryakian (eds.), Theoretical sociology, 337–65. New York: Appleton-Crofts.
Gee, James (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology and discourses. 2nd ed. London: Taylor & Francis.
Goffman, Erving (1969). Strategic interaction. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Green, Judith, & Wallat, Cynthia (1981). Ethnography and language in educational settings. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Greiffenhagen, Christian; Birmingham, Peter; & Watson, Rod (2003). An ethnomethodological take on ‘repair’: Pupils, corrections and computers. Paper presented to the International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK.
Guiterrez, Kris; Larson, Joanne; & Kreuter, Betsy (1995). Cultural tensions in the scripted classroom: The value of the subjugated perspective. Urban Education 29:410–42.Google Scholar
Gumperz, John (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Heritage, John (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity.
Hester, Stephen, & Eglin, Peter (1997). Culture in action: Studies in member categorisation analysis. Washington, DC: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis, and University Press of America.
Heap, James (1982). Understanding classroom events: A critique of Durkin, with an alternative. Journal of Reading Behavior 14:391–411.Google Scholar
Heap, James (1985). Discourse in the production of classroom knowledge: Reading lessons. Curriculum Inquiry 15:245–79.Google Scholar
Heap, James (1990). Applied ethnomethodology: Looking for the local rationality of reading activities. Human Studies 13:39–72.Google Scholar
Hindmarsh, Jon, & Heath, Christian (2000). Embodied reference: A study of deixis in workplace interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32:1855–78.Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail (1972). Side sequences. In D. Sudnow (ed.), Studies in social interaction, 294–338. New York: Free Press.
Jefferson, Gail (1974). Error correction as an interactional resource. Language in Society 2:181–99.Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail (1987). On exposed and embedded correction in conversation. In G. Button & J. Lee (eds.), Talk and social organization, 86–100. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Kirshner, David, & Whitson, James (1997). Situated cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lave, Jean (1984). Everyday cognition: Its development in social context. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lave, Jean, & Wenger, Etienne (1991). Situated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Lee, Carol (1995). A culturally based cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching African American high school students skills in literary interpretation. Reading Research Quarterly 30:608–30.Google Scholar
Lee, Yo An (2001). Towards a respecification of L2 communicative competence: Interactional fluency and L2 instruction. Dissertation, School of Teaching and Learning, Ohio State University.
Lemke, Jay L. (1995). Textual politics: Discourse and social dynamics. London: Taylor & Francis.
Lerner, Gene (1996). Finding ‘face’ in the preference structures of talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 59:303–21.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen (1983). Pragmatics. London: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Luke, Allan, & Freebody, Peter (1997). Shaping the social practices of reading. In S. Musprat et al. (eds.), Constructing critical literacies, 185–225. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
Lynch, Michael (1993). Scientific practice and ordinary action: Ethnomethodology and social studies of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lynch, Michael, & Bogen, David (1996). Spectacle of history: Speech, text and memory at the Iran–Contra hearings. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Macbeth, Douglas (1990). Classroom order as practical action. British Journal of Sociology of Education 11:189–214.Google Scholar
Macbeth, Douglas (1991). Teacher authority as practical action. Linguistics and Education 3:281–314.Google Scholar
Macbeth, Douglas (2000). Classrooms as installations. In S. Hester & J. Hughes (eds.), The local education order, 21–73. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRef
Macbeth, Douglas (2003). Learning lessons reconsidered: On the differences between the naturalistic and critical analysis of classroom discourse. American Educational Research Journal 40:239–80.Google Scholar
McHoul, Alec (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society 7:182–213.Google Scholar
McHoul, Alec (1990). The organization of repair in classrooms. Language in Society 19:349–77.Google Scholar
Mehan, Hugh (1978). Structuring school structure. Harvard Educational Review 48:32–64.Google Scholar
Mehan, Hugh (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRef
Michaels, Sarah (1981). Sharing time: Children's narrative style and differential access to literacy. Language in Society 10:432–42.Google Scholar
Mills, C. Wright (1940). Situated actions and vocabularies of motive. American Sociological Review 5:904–13.Google Scholar
Moerman, Michael, & Sacks, Harvey (1971 [1988]). On ‘understanding’ in the analysis of natural conversation. In M. Moerman, Talking culture, 180–86. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Newman, Denis; Griffen, Peg; & Cole, Michael (1989). The construction zone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Payne, George, & Hustler, David (1980). Teaching the class: The practical management of a cohort. British Journal of Sociology of Education 1:49–66.Google Scholar
Peterson, A. D. C. (1952). A hundred years of education. London: Gerald Duckworth.
Phillips, Susan (1972). Participant structures and communicative competence: Warm Springs children in community and classroom. In C. Cazden et al. (eds.), Functions of language in the classroom, 370–94. New York: Teachers College Press.
Pomerantz, Anita (1978). Compliment responses: Notes on the co-operation of multiple constraints. In J. Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction, 79–112. New York: Academic Press.CrossRef
Pomerantz, Anita (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Resnick, Lauren; Levine, John; & Teasley, Stephanie (1991). Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRef
Rogoff, Barbara (1990). The cultural context of cognitive activity. In B. Rogoff (ed.), Apprenticeship in thinking, 42–61. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ryle, Gilbert (1984). The concept of mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sacks, Harvey (1972). On the analyzability of stories by children. In John Gumperz & Dell Hymes (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics, 329–45. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Sacks, Harvey (1987). The preference for agreement and contiguity. In G. Button & R. Lee (eds.), Talk and social organization, 54–69. Philadelphia, PA: Multilingual Matters.
Sacks, Harvey (1992). Lectures on conversation. 2 vols. Ed. by Gail Jefferson. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sacks, Harvey, & Schegloff, Emanuel (1979). Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In G. Psathas (ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology, 15–21. New York: Irvington.
Sacks, Harvey; Schegloff, Emanuel; & Jefferson, Gail (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50:696–735.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey; Schegloff, Emanuel; Jefferson, Gail (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language 53:361–82.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel (1972). Notes on a conversational practice: Formulating place. In D. Sudnow (ed.), Studies in social interaction, 75–119. New York: Free Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel (1979). The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation. In T. Givón (ed.), Syntax and semantics, vol. XII, 261–88. New York: Academic Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel (1987a). Recycled turn beginnings: A precise repair mechanism in conversation's turn-taking organization. In G. Button & R. Lee (eds.), Talk and social organization, 70–85. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Schegloff, Emanuel (1987b). Some sources of misunderstanding in talk-in-interaction. Linguistics 25:210–18.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel (1989). Reflections on language, development, and the interactional character of talk-in-interaction. In M. Bornstein & J. Bruner (eds.), Interaction in human development, 139–53. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schegloff, Emanuel (1991). Conversation analysis and socially shared cognition. In L. Resnick et al. (eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition, 150–71. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRef
Schegloff, Emanuel (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology 97:1295–1345.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel (1997). Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair. Discourse Processes 23:499–545.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel (1998). Reply to Wetherell. Discourse and Society 9:413–16.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel (1999). ‘Schegloff's texts’ as Billig's data: A critical reply. Discourse and Society 10:558–72.Google Scholar
Searle, John (1969). Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Sharrock, Wes, & Anderson, Robert (1982). Talking and teaching: Reflective comments on in-classroom activities. In Payne &Hustler (eds.), Doing teaching, 170–83. London: Batesford.
Sharrock, Wes (1986). The ethnomethodologists. London: Tavistock.
Sinclair, J. M, & Coulthard, R. M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse. London: Oxford University Press.
Van Lier, Leo (1988). The classroom and the language learner. London: Longman.
Weeks, Peter (1985). Error–correction techniques and sequences in instructional settings: Toward a comparative framework. Human Studies 8:195–233.Google Scholar
Wells, Gordon (1993). Reevaluating the IRF Sequence. Linguistics and Education 5:1–37.Google Scholar
Wells, Gordon (1996). Using the tool-kit of discourse in the activity of learning and teaching. Mind, Culture and Activity 3(2):74–101.Google Scholar
Wetherell, Margaret (1998). Positioning and interpretative repertoires: Conversation analyses and post–structuralism in dialogue. Discourse and Society 9:387–412.Google Scholar
Wilson, Thomas (1971). Normative and interpretive paradigms in sociology. In J. Douglas (ed.), Understanding everyday life, 57–79. Chicago: Aldine.