Abstract
This study investigates the application of the Quality Talk (QT) framework in higher education classrooms based on cross-disciplinary content learning with theme-based class lessons and topical discussions. Specifically, this chapter discusses the correlation between participants’ schemata and the variety of question types prompted in small-group discussions under the QT framework in relation to conducting content-based university lectures in English-as-a- foreign-language (EFL) classroom settings. By drawing on theories from the QT framework, content-based instruction, and theme-based model, the qualitative and quantitative findings of students’ class entries and survey responses provide an enhanced understanding of the relationship between the variety, depth, and scope of questions associated with interdisciplinary learning in an EFL context. Overall, the analysis of various content areas and students’ familiarity with subject matter in relation to their self-initiated higher-order thinking questions, as well as identified challenges, illuminates the understanding of a relatively new domain.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Addison, N. M., & Walker, R. J. (2012). Contending with content: Notes on introducing a content-based instruction (CBI) approach in a media English course for third/fourth year elective students in a Japanese university. Journal of Bunkyo Gakuin University, Department of Foreign Languages and Bunkyo Gakuin College, 11, 241–257.
Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. (2003). Content-based second language instruction. University of Michigan Press.
Buterbaugh, J. (2017, September 27). Quality Talk increases critical thinking in high school STEM classrooms. Penn State News. https://news.psu.edu/story/484285/2017/09/27/academics/quality-talk-increases-critical-thinking-high-school-stem.
Butler, Y. G. (2005). Content-based instruction in EFL contexts: Considerations for effective implementation. JALT Journal, 27(2), 227–245.
Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49(2), 222–251.
Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. In California State Department of Education (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework. Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center California State University.
Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. Multilingual Matters.
Davies, M., & Meissel, K. (2016). The use of Quality Talk to increase critical analytical speaking and writing of students in three secondary schools. British Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 342–365.
Desautel, D. (2009). Becoming a thinking thinker: Metacognition, self-reflection and classroom practice. Teachers College Record, 111(8), 1997–2020.
Dueñas, M. (2004). The whats, whys, hows and whos of content-based instruction in second/foreign language education. International Journal of English Studies, 4(1), 73–96.
Kızıltan, N., & Ersanlı, C. Y. (2007). The contributions of theme-based CBI to Turkish young learners’ language development in English. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3(1), 133–148.
Krashen, S. (1981). Beyond language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Murphy, P. K., Firetto, C. M., & Greene, J. A. (2017). Enriching students’ scientific thinking through relational reasoning: Seeking evidence in texts, task, and talk. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 105–117.
Murphy, P. K., Firetto, C. M., Greene, J. A., & Butler, A. M. (2017). Analyzing the talk in Quality Talk discussions: A coding manual. https://doi.org/10.18113/S1XW64.
Murphy, P. K., Greene, J. A., Allen, E. M., Baszczewski, S., Swearingen, A. K., Wei, L., & Butler, A. M. (2018). Fostering high school students’ scientific argumentation and conceptual understanding performance through Quality Talk discussions. Science Education, 102(6), 1239–1264.
Murphy, P. K., Greene, J. A., Firetto, C. M., Hendrick, B. D., Li, M., Montalbano, C., & Wei, L. (2018). Quality Talk: Developing students’ discourse to promote high level comprehension. American Educational Research Journal, 55(5), 1113–1160.
Murphy, P. K., Rowe, M. L., Ramani, G., & Silverman, R. (2014). Promoting critical analytic thinking in children and adolescents at home and in school. Educational Psychology Review, 26(4), 561–578.
Murphy, P. K., Wilkinson, I. A., 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.
Ngan, N. T. C. (2011). Content-based instruction in the teaching of English for accounting at Vietnamese College of Finance and Customs. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 90–100.
Reznitskaya, A., & Gregory, M. (2013). Student thought and classroom language: Examining the mechanisms of change in dialogic teaching. Educational Psychologist, 48(2), 114–133.
Reznitskaya, A., Kuo, L., Clark, A., 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.
Satilmis, Y., Yakup, D., Selim, G., & Aybarsha, I. (2015). Teaching concepts of natural sciences to foreigners through content-based instruction: The adjunct model. English Language Teaching, 8(3), 97–103.
Schwarz, B. B., Neuman, Y., & Biezuner, S. (2000). Two wrongs may make right .if they argue together! Cognition & Instruction, 18(4), 461–494.
Villalobos, O. B. (2013). Content-based instruction: A relevant approach of language teaching. Journal of Innovation Education, XV(20), 71–83.
Warrington, S. D. (2010). Concerns with content-based instruction (CBI) in Asian EFL contexts. The Buckingham Journal of Language and Linguistics, 1, 129–141.
Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., & Dawes, L. (1999). From social interaction to individual reasoning: An empirical investigation of a possible sociocultural model of cognitive development. Learning and Instruction, 9(6), 493–516.
Wegman, B., & Knezevic, M. (2014). Mosaic 2 Reading. (Sixth edition). McGraw-Hill.
Wilkinson, I. A., Soter, A. O., & Murphy, K. P. (2010). Developing a model of Quality Talk about literary text. In M. G. McKeown & L. Kucan (Eds.), Bringing reading researchers to life: Essays in honor of Isabel L. Beck (pp. 142–169). Guilford Press.
Yugandhar, D. K. (2016). Content-theme-based instruction to increase the quality of EFL class. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature (IJSELL), 8(4), 86–90.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tzean, (.YS. (2021). Quality Talk and Content Learning: An Exploration of Students’ Background Schemata and Thematic Discussions. In: Chen, CC., Lo, ML. (eds) The Theory and Practice of Group Discussion with Quality Talk. Learning Sciences for Higher Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1409-5_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1409-5_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-1408-8
Online ISBN: 978-981-16-1409-5
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)