Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interaction Analysis and Teacher Cognition

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Language Teacher Cognition

Abstract

This chapter discusses the role of interaction in understanding cognition, in particular conversation analysis (CA) and discourse analysis are compared to propose why applied CA is useful in the study of teacher cognition. The chapter makes a strong case for conversation analysis-for-teacher cognition and discusses teacher cognition and professional discourse, as well as key constructs in CA. This chapter demonstrates how the fine-grained, ‘up-close’ analysis offered by CA provides an in-depth understanding of what teachers think in a moment-by-moment interaction in their professional context; a concept termed as ‘cognition-in-interaction’ (Li, Social interaction and teacher cognition. Edinburgh University Press, 2017a).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ahmed, M. K. (1994). Speaking as cognitive regulation: A Vygotskian perspective on dialogic communication. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 157–171). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antaki, C. (2008). Discourse analysis and conversation analysis. In P. Alasuutari, L. Bickman, & J. Brannan (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social research methods (pp. 431–446). London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Antaki, C., Billig, M., Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (2003). Discourse analysis means doing analysis: A critique of six analytic shortcomings. Discourse Analysis On Line, 1(1). Retrieved from https://extra.shu.ac.uk/daol/articles/open/2002/002/antaki2002002-paper.html 

  • Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brazil, D. (1997). The communicative value of intonation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brazil, D. C. (1995). Classroom and spoken discourse. Centre for English language studies. Birmingham: The University of Birmingham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copland, F. (2008). Deconstructing the discourse: Understanding the feedback event. In S. Garton & K. Richards (Eds.), Professional encounters in TESOL: Discourses of teachers in teaching (pp. 1–5). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coulthard, M. (1985). An introduction to discourse analysis (2nd ed.). Burnt Mill: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work (pp. 3–65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drew, P., & Sorjonen, M.-L. (1997). Institutional dialogue. In T. v. Dijk (Ed.), Discourse: A multidisciplinary introduction. Volume 2: Discourse as social interaction in society. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, M. R., & Cheyne, J. (2002). Private speech in young adults: Task difficulty, self-regulation, and psychological predication. Cognitive Development, 16, 889–906. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2014(01)00069-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edward, A. D., & Westgate, D. P. G. (1994). Investigating classroom talk (2nd ed.). London and Washington, DC: Routledge and Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, A., Gilroy, P., & Hartley, D. (2002). Re-thinking teacher education: Collaborating for uncertainty. London: Routledge and Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R. (1998). Discourse control and the acquisition-rich classroom. In W. A. Renandya & G. M. Jacobs (Eds.), Learners and language learning, Anthology (pp. 145–171). Singapore: SEAMO Regional Language Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furrow, D. (1984). Social and private speech at two years. Child Development, 55, 355–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, A. C. (2013). Introduction to interaction: Understanding talk in formal and informal settings. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J., & Morton, T. (2018). Social interaction and teacher identity. Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (1997). Conversation analysis and institutional talk: Analyzing data. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative analysis: Issues of theory and method (pp. 161–182). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (1998). Conversation analysis and institutional talk: Analyzing distinctive turn-taking systems. In S. Cmejrková, J. Hoffmannová, O. Müllerová, & J. Svetlá (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of IADA (International Association for Dialog Analysis) (pp. 3–17). Tubingen: Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (2004). Conversation analysis and institutional talk: Analysing data. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (pp. 222–245). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (2010). Conversation analysis: Practices and methods. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative sociology (3rd ed., pp. 208–230). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (2013). Language and social institutions: The conversation analytic view. Journal of Foreign Languages, 36(4), 2–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (2008). Conversation analysis (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jefferson, G. (1986). Notes on “latency” in overlap onset. Human Studies, 9, 153–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenks, C. J. (2014). Social interaction in second language chat rooms. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kronk, C. M. (1994). Private speech in adolescents. Adolescence, 29, 781–804.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lantolf, J. P. (2000b). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 1–26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Li, L. (2013). The complexity of language teachers’ beliefs and practice: One EFL teacher’s theories. Language Learning Journal, 41(2), 175–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, L. (2017a). Social interaction and teacher cognition. Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malouf, R. (1995). Towards an analysis of multi-party discourse [Online]. Retrieved July 17, 2001, from http://hpsg.stanford.edu/rob/talk/node2.html

  • Markee, N. (2004). Zones of interactional transition in ESL classes. The Modern Language Journal, 88, 583–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McHoul, A. (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society, 7, 183–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, M. (1986). Language and power: A critical review of ‘Studies in the Theory of Ideology’ by John B. Thompson. Media, Culture and Society, 8, 41–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, T. (2012). Classroom talk, conceptual change and teacher reflection in bilingual science teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(1), 101–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, T., & Gray, J. (2010). Personal practical knowledge and identity in lesson planning conferences on a pre-service TESOL course. Language Teaching Research, 14(3), 297–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomerantz, A. M. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessment: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., & Hepburn, A. (2005). Qualitative interviews in psychology: Problems and possibilities. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2, 281–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation. 2 vols. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70, 1075–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A. (1991). Reflection on talk and social structure. In D. Boden & D. H. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1295–1345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A., Koshik, I., Jacoby, S., & Olsher, D. (2002). Conversation analysis and applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 3–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 7, 289–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seedhouse, P. (2005). Conversation analysis and language learning. Language Teaching, 38(4), 165–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seedhouse, P. (2011). Conversation analytic research into language teaching and learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 345–363). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seedhouse, P., & Walsh, S. (2010). Learning a second language through classroom interaction. In P. Seedhouse, S. Walsh, & J. Chris (Eds.), Conceptualising ‘learning’ in applied linguistics (pp. 127–146). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sert, O. (2015). Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, J., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, J., & Coulthard, M. (1992). Towards an analysis of discourse. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in spoken discourse analysis (pp. 1–34). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ten Have, P. (2007). Doing conversation analysis (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, S. (2002). Construction or obstruction: Teacher talk and learner involvement in the EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating classroom discourse. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, S. (2011). Exploring classroom discourse: Language in action. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, S., & Li, L. (2013). Conversation as space for learning. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 244–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waring, H. Z. (2009). Moving out of IRF (initiation-response-feedback): A single case analysis. Language Learning, 59(4), 796–824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waring, H. Z. (2016). Theorizing pedagogical interaction: Insights from conversation analysis. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Winsler, A., & Naglieri, J. A. (2003). Overt and covert verbal problem-solving strategies: Developmental trends in use, awareness, and relations with task performance in children age 5 to 17. Child Development, 74, 659–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, J., & Waring, H. Z. (2010). Conversation analysis and second language pedagogy: A guide for ESL/EFL teachers. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Education, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK

    Li Li

Authors
  1. Li Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Li Li .

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Li, L. (2020). Interaction Analysis and Teacher Cognition. In: Language Teacher Cognition. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51134-8_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51134-8_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-51133-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-51134-8

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation