FAQ

The agential qualities of silence in post-observation feedback sessions

Publication date: 21.11.2024

Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, 2024, Volume 141, Issue 4, pp. 219 - 230

https://doi.org/10.4467/20834624SL.24.013.20463

Authors

Anna Bąk-Średnicka
Jan Kochanowski University in Kielce
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8932-659X Orcid
All publications →

Titles

The agential qualities of silence in post-observation feedback sessions

Abstract

This study explores silence in a corpus of university supervisors’ (USs) utterances in the context of post-observation feedback conferences (POFCs) with their Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) supervisees. The USs’ utterances and corre­sponding silences were divided into educative, supportive and evaluative conversational frames (Long et al. 2013), with a view to discovering the extent and nature of the silent spells within these frames. It appears that silent spells within the educative frame type were a powerful means of communication comparable to reflection hubs, which could be allocated to increased “wait time” (Rowe 1972) or “slow-time” (Bruneau 1973) and could also be considered examples of social or commission silences. The agential quali­ties of this silence, though, can in certain cases be disempowered due to a tutee’s close-mindedness towards what happened during their lessons. Conversely, silent moments in the evaluative frame served to recall the observed lessons and included examples of empirical silence or omissive silence that the USs failed to use. This ethnographic research on USs’ silence is an extension of previous studies on USs’ POFCs discourse, and the self-analysis is a self-awareness-raising-tool in order that USs may become more cognizant of the ways POFCs are managed.

References

Download references

Bao D. 2014. Understanding silence and reticence: Ways of participating in second language acquisition. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Bilmes J. 1994. Constituting silence: Life in the world of total meaning. − Semiotica 98: 73−87.

Bista K. 2012. Silence in teaching and learning: Perspectives of a Nepalese graduate student. − College Teaching 60.2: 76−82.

Blackmur R.P. 1957. The language of silence. − Anshen Ruth N. (ed.). Language: An enquiry into its meaning and function. New York: Harper and Row: 134−152.

Blumberg A., Cusick P. 1969. Supervisor-teacher interaction: An analysis of verbal behavior. Paper presented at annual meeting, AERA, Minneapolis 1970.

Brito Vieira M. 2021. Silence in political theory and practice. − Critical Review of Interna­tional Social and Political Philosophy 24.3: 289−295.

Bruneau T.J. 1973. Communicative silences: Forms and functions. − Journal of Communica­tion 23.1: 17−46.

Copland F., Donaghue H. 2021. Analysing discourses in teacher observation feedback confer­ences. New York: Routledge.

Copland F. 2008. Feedback in pre-service English language teacher training: Discourses of process and power. [unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Birmingham].

Creswell J.W., Guetterman T.C. 2021. Educational research. Planning, conducting, and evalu­ating quantitative and qualitative research. [6th ed.]. Harlow: Pearson.

Demszky D., Liu J. 2023. M-Powering teachers: Natural language processing powered feedback improves 1:1 instruction and student outcomes. − Proceedings of the Tenth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S ‘23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 59–69. [available at: https://doi.org/10.1145/3573051.3593379, ac­cessed: 7 July 2023].

Farr F. 2011. The discourse of teaching practice feedback. New York: Routledge.

Finke L. 1993. Knowledge as bait: Feminism, voice and the pedagogical unconscious. − Col­lege English 55.1: 7−27.

Fjeld T. 2022. The silence of the educated. − Journal of Silence Studies in Education 2.1: 43−55.

Hanh N.T. 2020. Silence is gold?: A study on students’ silence in EFL classrooms. − Interna­tional Journal of Higher Education 9.4: 153−160.

Hanna A. 2021. Silence at school: Uses and experiences of silence in pedagogy at a secondary school. − British Educational Research Journal 47.5: 1158–1176.

Heath C. 1992. The delivery and reception of diagnoses in the general practice consultation. − Drew P., Heritage J. (eds.). Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 235−267.

Hopkins D. 1999. Giving praise and criticism: A study of the language of a post-observation feedback discussion on a pre-service training course. − Research News (The Newsletter of the IATEFL Research SIG) 11: 38−48.

Jaworski A. 1993. The power of silence. Social and pragmatic perspectives. New York: Sage Publications.

Jaworski A., Sachdev I. 1998. Beliefs about silence in the classroom. − Language and Educa­tion 12.4: 273−292.

Korwin-Piotrowska D. 2015. Białe znaki. Milczenie w strukturze i znaczeniu utworów nar­racyjnych (Na przykładach z polskiej prozy współczesnej). Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uni­wersytetu Jagiellońskiego.

Long J.J., van Es E.A., Black R.W. 2013. Supervisor–student teacher interactions: The role of conversational frames in developing a vision of ambitious teaching. − Linguistics and Education 24: 179−196.

Olearczyk T. 2016. Cisza w edukacji szkolnej. Kraków: Krakowska Akademia im. Andrzeja Frycza Modrzewskiego.

Ollin R. 2008. Silent pedagogy and rethinking classroom practice: Structuring teaching through silence rather than talk. − Cambridge Journal of Education 38.2: 265−280.

Phillips D. 1994. The functions of silence within the context of teacher training. − English Language Teaching Journal 48.3: 266−271.

Phillips D. 1997. Teacher training: Observation and feedback. − McGrath I. (ed.). Learning to train: Perspectives on the development of language teacher trainers. Hemel Hampstead: Prentice Hall: 82−88.

Phillips D. 1999. The feedback session within the context of teacher training and development: An analysis of discourse, role and function. [unpublished PhD dissertation, University of London].

Picard M. 1961. The world of silence. Washington: Regnery Gateway.

Pomerantz A. 1984. Pursuing a response. − Atkinson J.M., Heritage J. (eds.). Structures of social action: Studies in conversational analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 152−164.

Rowe M.B. 1972. Wait-time and rewards as instructional variables: Their influence on language, logic, and fate control. Chicago: ERIC.

Shcherbak N.F., Potienko V.I. 2021. Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects of silence: A struc­tural model of communication. − Discourse 7.3: 20−35.

Shan C. 2020. Classroom silence in college English class in China. − US-China Foreign Language 18.5: 141−150.

Sontag S. 1966/2009. Styles of radical will. London: Penguin Books.

Tannen D., Savile-Troika M. 1985. Introduction. – Tannen D., Savile-Troika M. (eds.). Per­spectives on silence. Norwood, NJ: Ablex: xi–xviii.

Tannen D. 1985. Silence: Anything but. − Tannen D., Saville-Troika M. (eds.). Perspectives on silence. Norwood, NJ: Ablex: 93−111.

Vassilopoulos S.P., Konstantinidis G. 2012. Teacher use of silence in elementary education. − Journal of Teaching and Learning 8.1: 91−105.

Wajnryb R. 1994. The pragmatics of feedback: A study of mitigation in the supervisory discourse of TESOL teacher educators. [unpublished PhD dissertation, Macquarie University].

Wang R., Demszky D. 2023. Is ChatGPT a good teacher coach? Measuring zero-shot per­formance for scoring and providing actionable insights on classroom instruction. − 18th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications, 13 July 2023, Toronto, Canada. [available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.03090, accessed: 7 July 2023].

Watzlawick P., Beavin J.H., Jackson D.D. 1967. Pragmatics of human communication. A study of interactional patterns, pathologies, and paradoxes. New York: Norton & Co.

Zhang J., Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil C. 2020. Balancing objectives in counseling conversations: Advancing forwards or looking backwards. − Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics on July 5–10: 5276–5289. [available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.04245, accessed: 7 July 2023].

Information

Information: Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, 2024, Volume 141, Issue 4, pp. 219 - 230

Article type: Original article

Authors

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8932-659X

Anna Bąk-Średnicka
Jan Kochanowski University in Kielce
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8932-659X Orcid
All publications →

Jan Kochanowski University in Kielce

Published at: 21.11.2024

Article status: Open

Licence: CC BY  licence icon

Percentage share of authors:

Anna Bąk-Średnicka (Author) - 100%

Article corrections:

-

Publication languages:

English