Tegler2024
| Tegler2024 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Tegler2024 |
| Author(s) | Helena Tegler, Helen Melander Bowden |
| Title | Aided-speaking students’ unsolicited questions in teacher-fronted classroom talk: the use of speech-generating devices to ask questions |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, In Press, Unsolicited questions, Classroom interaction, Speech and language difficulties, Aided communication |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2024 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Classroom Discourse |
| Volume | |
| Number | |
| Pages | |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/19463014.2024.2322597 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Using the framework of conversation analysis, this paper examines aided-speaking students’ unsolicited speech-generating device (SGD)-mediated questions in teacher-fronted classroom talk. The analysis draws on a corpus of 18 h of video-recorded classroom interactions including 23 aided-speaking students using SGDs or picture-based communication boards. In all, 5% of the students’ contributions were unsolicited questions, produced by three students. The students were found to orient to turn transition relevance places, but due to prolonged production time their questions risked sequential and topical misplacement in the ongoing classroom talk and were vulnerable to misunderstandings. To address this problem, students activated the synthetic voice before finalising the question, claiming the interactional floor while securing time to complete their utterance. They also refrained from activating the synthetic voice and instead made the question visually available for the teacher to read, thereby transferring the responsibility for answering the question to the teacher when sequentially and topically relevant. The study demonstrates the complex interactional process of formulating SGD-mediated questions, sometimes requiring that the teacher, assistants, and students engage in repair work and scaffolding to establish the meaning of a student’s utterance. The findings imply that the treatment of non-speaking students’ contributions as questions requires designated teacher work.
Notes
