Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T03:42:51.412Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Model for Effective Classroom Discourse: Predicated Topics with Reduced Verbal Memory Demands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2016

Marion Blank  and
Sheila J. White
Marion Blank*
Affiliation:
Columbia University and Coney Island Hospital
Sheila J. White
Affiliation:
Columbia University and Coney Island Hospital
*
Correspondence should be directed to M. Blank, Ph.D. 59 E. 75th St., Suite #4A, New York, NY 10021
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

School failure often stems from a mismatch between the language used by children and the language used in schools. Central to the mismatch is the fact that schools use “extended texts” (i.e., long stretches of language that expound a topic). Extended texts impose major and unique language processing demands that are unfamiliar to many children. At the same time, these texts cannot be abandoned since they are central to the school’s educational mission. However, it is possible to modify the form they have commonly taken. This form, developed to meet the constraints of a prior time, is marked by dual disadvantages: a) it emphasizes memory for details, a skill that is problematic in many language disabled students and b) it is based upon “isolated” decontextualized concepts that do not support coherent discussion. This paper offers an alternative model for classroom text which involves the use of a) memory aids (i.e., materials to reduce the need for recall of verbal details) and b) “predicated topics,” (i.e., patterns for structuring conceptual information in a predictable and relevant manner).

Type
Research Article
Information
Australasian Journal of Special Education , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , 1992 , pp. 32 - 39
Copyright
Copyright © The Australian Association of Special Education 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bernstein, B. (1975). Class, codes and social control. New York: Schocken.Google Scholar
Blank, M. (1987). Classroom Text: The next stage of intervention. In Schiefelbsuch, R.L. & Lloyd, L. L. (Eds.), Language perspectives: Acquisition, retardation and intervention. 2nd Edition Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed Press.Google Scholar
Blank, M. & Klig, S. (1982). The Child and the School Experience. In Kopp, C.B. & Krakow, J. B. (Eds.). The child: Development in a social context. Reading, MA. Addsion-Wesley.Google Scholar
Blank, M. & Marquis, M.A. (1987). Directing discourse: 80 Situations for teaching meaningful conversation to children. Tucson, AZ: Communication Skill Builders.Google Scholar
Blank, M. & White, S.J. (1986). Questions: A powerful form of classroom exchange. Topics in Language Disorders, 6, 1–12.Google Scholar
Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Delamont, S. (1983). Interaction in the classroom. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Dickinson, D., Wolf, M. & Stotsky, S. (1989). Words move: The interwoven development of oral and written language. In Berko Gleason, J. (Ed.) The development of language. Columbus, OH: Merrill.Google Scholar
Gallagher, T.M. (Ed.) (1991). Pragmatics of language: Clinical practice issues. San Diego: Singular.Google Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K & Hasan, R. (1989). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hirsch, E.D. Jr. (1987). Cultural literacy. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Horowitz, R.H. (1985). Text patterns: Part I. Journal of Reading, 28, 448–454.Google Scholar
Horowitz, R.H. & Samuels, S.J. (Eds.) (1987). Comprehending Oral and Written Language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Langer, J.A. (1985). Children’s sense of genre: A study of performance on paraellel reading and writing Tasks. Written Communication 2, 157–187.Google Scholar
Mandl, H., Stem, R.L. & Trabasso, T. (Eds.) (1984). Learning and comprehension of text. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Google Scholar
Meyer, B. J. F., Brandt, D.M. & Bluth, G. J. (1980). Use of top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 72–103.Google Scholar
Schnotz, W. (1984). Comparative instructional text organization. In Mandl, H., Stein, N.L., & Trabasso, T., (Eds.) Learning and comprehension of text, (pp.53–82) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Scinto, L.F.M. (1986). Written language and psychological development New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, B.M. & Samuels, S. J. (1983). Children’s use of text structure in the recall of expository materials. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 517–528.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L.S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. In Cole, M., John Steiner, V., Scribner, S., & Souberman, E. (Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
White, S. J. (1987). Lost for words: A Vygotskian perspective on the developing use of words by hearing-impaired children. Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, 9, 111–115.Google Scholar