Supportive teacher talk: the importance of the F‐move

By R. Cullen. 2002

228 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/957c12697a9e433cd570c74842d0c31061f844ba

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Language and Linguistics

1. J. Snell
2. Maureen P. Boyd
3. Mirit Israeli
4. D. Rubin
5. W. Lee
6. Sara Sze Yan Ng
7. Adam Lefstein

In Literature and Literary Theory

1. Maureen P. Boyd
2. D. Rubin
3. J. Snell
4. W. Lee
5. Sara Sze Yan Ng
6. Adam Lefstein

Citations in the corpus

• Reducing student reticence through teacher interaction strategy (2010, background): “It is found that ‘teachers instinctively adopt an IRF mode of instruction because it is perceived, perhaps unconsciously, to be a powerful pedagogical device for transmitting and constructing knowledge’ (Cullen 2002: 118).”
• From Moves to Sequences: Expanding the Unit of Analysis in the Study of Classroom Discourse. (2015, background): “…also problematic: the educative qualities of dialogic interaction do not derive in and of themselves from teacher questions, but rather from the subsequent student participation and teacher follow-up that are assumed to be stimulated by such questions (see e.g. Cullen, 2002; Nassaji & Wells, 2000).”
• How Contingent Questioning Promotes Extended Student Talk: A Function of Display Questions (2006, background): “The dominant IRE and IRF instructional practice is criticized for not providing opportunities for students to ask questions, nominate topics of interest, and negotiate meaning (Cullen, 2002).”