Teachers research teacher talk
Open accessAbstract
This article describes an in-service training project designed to raise trainees' awareness, through the analysis of transcriptions of teaching sequences, of the degree of communicativeness in their classroom interactions. The presence or absence of such features of communicative classroom talk as referential questions, feedback on content, wait time, and learner-initiated interaction, are used as ‘bottom-up’ markers of communicative, content-driven, teacher–student interaction. Trainees’ analyses showed evidence of growing awareness of their non—communicative ritualized teaching behaviours, awareness that, at least in some cases, resulted in improved classroom practice.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Referential questions have a specific purpose of allowing students to express their opinions and exchange information.
“Additionally, these kinds of questions have a specific purpose of allowing students to express their opinions and exchange information (Ellis, 1994;Thompson,1997;Thornbury, 1996).”
From An investigation into the classroom talk of Iranian EFL novice vs. experienced teachers (2019) · cites this paper as Thornbury, 1996
The indexed copy’s Additional information section describes discussion questions and a debate, but does not identify them as referential questions or state the purpose attributed to them. Searches for “referential questions,” expressing opinions and exchanging information, and “referential” found no passage addressing that specific claim; the available section labels also appear to describe a different document from the cited article. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 24
- A. Ermeling, B., & Graff-Ermeling, G. (2014). Learning to learn from teaching: a first-hand account of lesson study in Japan. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 3(2), 170-191
- Chesebro, J. L., & McCroskey, J. C. (2001). The relationship of teacher clarity and immediacy with student state receiver apprehension, affect, and cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50(1), 59-68.
- Civikly, J. M. (1992). Clarity: Teachers and students making sense of instruction. Communication Education, 41(2), 138-152.
- Corder, S. (1967). THE SIGNIFICANCE OF LEARNER'S ERRORS. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching.
- Cullen, R. (1998). Teacher talk and the classroom context. ELT journal, 52(3), 179-187.
- Chesebro, J. L., & McCroskey, J. C. (2001). The relationship of teacher clarity and immediacy with student state receiver apprehension, affect, and cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50(1), 59-68.
- Denzin, NK. (1978). Sociological Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Dudley, P. (2011). How Lesson Study orchestrates key features of teacher knowledge and teacher learning to create profound changes in professional practice. Presented at the World Association of Lesson Studies Annual Conference, Tokyo.
- Ellis, R. (2012). Language teaching research and language pedagogy. Malden, Mass: Wiley- Blackwell.
- Kohomen, V. (1992). Experiental language learning: second language learning as cooperative learner education. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Collaborative language learning and teaching (pp. 14-39). Cambridge [England: Cambridge University Press.
- Lenski, S. J., & Caskey, M. M. (2009). Using the Lesson Study Approach to Plan for Student Learning. Middle School Journal, 40(3), 50-57.
- Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press
- Krashen, S., & Terrell, T. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Oxford [u.a.: Pergamon Press [u.a.]
- Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Beyond methods: Macrostrategies for language teaching. New Haven: Yale University Press.
- O'Neill, R. (1994, April). The myth of the silent teacher. In International Association for Teachers of English as a Foreign Language Conference. Brighton, UK. Retrieved Dec (Vol. 8, p. 2009).
- Perry, R. R., & Lewis, C. C. (2009). What is successful adaptation of lesson study in the US?. Journal of Educational Change, 10(4), 365-391.
- Richardson, J. T. (2005). Instruments for obtaining student feedback: A review of the literature. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 387-415.
- Rock, T. C., & Wilson, C. (2005). Improving teaching through lesson study.Teacher Education Quarterly, 77-92. "bilingualism"? Profile Issues in Teachers Professional Development, (9), 181-196.
- Seldin, P. (1989). Using student feedback to improve teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1989(37), 89-97.
- Sidelinger, R. J., & McCroskey, J. C. (1997). Communication correlates of teacher clarity in the college classroom. Communication Research Reports, 14(1), 1-10.
- Silver, R., & Kogut, G. (2009). Teacher talk, pedagogical talk and classroom activities: Another look. In Educational Research Association of Singapore (ERAS) Conference
- Thornbury, S. (1996). Teachers research teacher talk. Elt Journal, 50(4), 279 -289. doi:10.1093/elt/50.4.279.
- Williams, E. J. (1985). Research on teacher clarity. Teacher Education Quarterly, 33-38.
- Yanfen, L., & Yuqin, Z. (2010). A Study of Teacher Talk in Interactions in English Classes. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics (Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press), 33(2).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Teacher Interruptions and Limited Wait Time in EFL Young Learner Classrooms
Yataganbaba, E., & Yıldırım, R. (2016) · Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.094 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
An investigation into the classroom talk of Iranian EFL novice vs. experienced teachers
Ghajarieh, A., Jalali, N., & Mozaheb, M. A. (2019) · Register Journal · doi:10.18326/rgt.v12i2.100-125 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
“Additionally, these kinds of questions have a specific purpose of allowing students to express their opinions and exchange information (Ellis, 1994; Thompson,1997; Thornbury, 1996).”
BackgroundResult
- Authors
- Thornbury, S.
- Affiliations
- Cambridge University Press (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Thornbury, S.
- Venue
- ELT Journal
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1996-10-01
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 279-289
- ISSN
- 0951-0893 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-4526
- OpenAlex
- W1992742839
- Cited by
- 150
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 12.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- ELT Journal (publishedVersion)
- Intellectum (Universidad de La Sabana) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
- American Educational Research Association
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Communication in Education and Healthcare
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
- Keywords
- teacher discourse, continuing teacher education, pre-service teachers, classroom interaction analysis, referential questions, waiting time, teacher awareness
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
