Teacher Cognition and Interactive Decision-Making



This chapter focuses on critical moments in teaching and explores how teachers make their interactive decisions (Tsui, Understanding expertise in teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003) by carefully scrutinizing classroom interaction. Because of the significance of teachers’ interactive decisions, this chapter explicates what knowledge is activated and how teachers use it in making decisions about their day-to-day and moment-to-moment activities. Based on Li (Social interaction and teacher cognition. Edinburgh University Press, 2017a), this chapter discusses possible explanations for teachers to make interactive decisions, including (1) unexpected or dispreferred contribution from students; (2) task difficulty level; (3) claim of insufficient knowledge; and (4) emerging learning opportunities.


Language teacher cognition Interactive decision Online decision Unexpected event Preferred and dispreferred contribution Task Learning opportunity Insufficient knowledge 


  1. Bailey, K. M. (1996). The best laid plans: Teachers’ in-class decisions to depart from their lesson plans. In K. M. Bailey & D. Nunan (Eds.), Voices from the language classroom: Qualitative research in second language education (pp. 15–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Beach, W. A. (1993). Transitional regularities for ‘causal’ ‘okay’ usages. Journal of Pragmatics, 19, 25–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  4. Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 255–296). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  5. Duffy, G. (1982). Response to Borko, Shavelson and Stern: There’s more to instructional decision-making in reading than the “empty classroom”. Reading Research Quarterly, 17(2), 295–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ekman, P. (1979). About brows: Emotional and conversational signals. In M. von Cranach, K. Foppa, W. Lepenies, & D. Ploog (Eds.), Human ethology (pp. 169–248). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Fagan, D. S. (2012). ‘Dealing with’ unexpected learner contributions in whole-group activities: An examination of novice language teacher discursive practices. Classroom Discourse, 3, 107–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goffman, E. (1983). The interaction order: American Sociological Association, 1982 presidential address. American Sociological Review, 48(1), 17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goodwin, C. (1979). The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 97–121). New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
  11. Hawkins, B. (2007). Open-endedness, the instructional conversation and the activity system: How might they come together? In R. Alahen & S. Pöyhönen (Eds.), Language in action: Vygotsky and Leontievian legacy today (pp. 245–279). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
  12. He, A. W. (2004). CA for SLA: Arguments from the Chinese language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 88, 568–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Johnson, K. E. (1992). The relationship between teachers’ beliefs and practices during literacy instruction for non-native speakers of English. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24(1), 83–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Joyce, B. (1978). Toward a theory of information processing in teaching. Educational Research Quarterly, 3, 66–76.Google Scholar
  15. Koshik, I. (2002). Designedly incomplete utterances: A pedagogical practice for eliciting knowledge displays in error correction sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 35, 277–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Li, L. (2011). Obstacles and opportunities for developing thinking through interaction in language classrooms. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6(3), 146–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li, L. (2013). The complexity of language teachers’ beliefs and practice: One EFL teacher’s theories. Language Learning Journal, 41(2), 175–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Li, L. (2017a). Social interaction and teacher cognition. Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Liddicoat, A. J. (2007). An introduction to conversation analysis. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  20. Markee, N. (1995). Teachers’ answers to learners’ questions: Problematizing the issue of making meaning. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6, 63–92.Google Scholar
  21. Markee, N. (2004). Zones of interactional transition in ESL classes. The Modern Language Journal, 88, 583–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McMahon, L. A. (1995). A study of how teachers employ their teaching skills during interactive decision making (Doctoral dissertation, University of Lowell, 1995). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56, 2205.Google Scholar
  23. Mullock, B. (2006). The pedagogical knowledge base of four TESOL teachers. The Modern Language Journal, 90, 48–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nunan, D. (1992). The teacher as decision-maker. In J. Flowerdew, M. Brock, & S. Hsia (Eds.), Perspectives on second language teacher education (pp. 135–165). Hong Kong: City Polytechnic.Google Scholar
  25. Rampton, B. (2006). Language in late modernity: Interaction in an urban school. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Richards, J. C. (1998). Teacher beliefs and decision making. In J. C. Richards (Ed.), Beyond training (pp. 65–85). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Richards, K. (2006). ‘Being the teacher’: Identity and classroom conversation. Applied Linguistics, 27, 51–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sacks, H., & Schegloff, E. A. (2002). Home position. Gesture, 2(2), 133–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schegloff, E. A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 7, 289–327.Google Scholar
  30. Schwab, G. (2012). Secondary schools in Germany and the notion of ‘English for all’. Anglistik, 23(1), 25–38.Google Scholar
  31. Sert, O. (2011). A micro-analytic investigation of claims of insufficient knowledge in EAL classrooms. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Newcastle.Google Scholar
  32. Sert, O., & Walsh, S. (2013). The interactional management of claims of insufficient knowledge in English language classrooms. Language and Education, 27(6), 542–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shavelson, R. J. (1983). Review of research on teachers’ pedagogical judgement, plans, and decisions. Elementary School Journal, 83, 392–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shavelson, R. J., & Stern, P. (1981). Research on teachers’ pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisions, and behavior. Review of Educational Research, 51, 455–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stevick, E. (1982). Teaching and learning languages. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. ten Have, P. (2007). Doing conversation analysis (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Terasaki, A. (2005). Pre-announcement sequences in conversation. In G. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 171–224). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  38. Tsang, W. K. (2004). Teachers’ personal practical knowledge and interactive decisions. Language Teaching Research, 8(2), 163–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tsui, A. A. M. (2003). Understanding expertise in teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tsui, A. B. M. (2005). Expertise in teaching: Perspectives and issues. In K. Johnson (Ed.), Expertise in second language learning and teaching (pp. 167–189). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. van Lier, L. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 245–260). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Walsh, S. (2002). Construction or obstruction: Teacher talk and learner involvement in the EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating classroom discourse. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
  46. Woods, D. (1996). Teacher cognition in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of EducationUniversity of ExeterExeterUK

Personalised recommendations