Integrating Language Teachers’ Discipline Knowledge in a Language Course
INSTRUCTOR PROFILES
First Profile: Monica
Cognitive and Interactional Processes Used in the Development of the Lesson
The development of the lesson as regards the cognitive processes deployed and its interactional structure can be illustrated by the extract below, corresponding to the first phase of the lesson, in which the instructor introduces cause-effect connectors by explaining a list of them one by one:
Class 5 – Monica
T: we have ‘although’ <6> can you think? |please| what do we write after ‘although’? <3> in | terms of syntax
S: sometimes xxx
T: so we write a subject plus a verb |right? [writes on the blackboard] <7> ok? for example what does it mean? let’s do the translation | also
S: ‘tot i que’
T: ‘tot i que’ | I’ve got the Spanish translation | that’s x <4> xxx cause and effect <2> good | ‘I’m going to continue with my English although I know I’m not the most gifted linguist’ <1> so we could use the_ <2> yeah | the the examples are the ones which you have here | so ‘I’m going to continue with my English | although I know I’m not the most gifted linguist’ | ok? <1> which is the opposite of | ‘although’?
S: ‘however’
T: the opposite <7> [writes on the blackboard] <7> you have in that page | the opposite of ‘although’ | is <8> nobody? <8> ‘because’ <4> [writes on the blackboard] <8> ‘porque’ | yes? so | ‘aunque’ | ‘porque’ | for example | ‘I’m going to continue with my English | although I know I’m not the most gifted <1> linguist’ | and the opposite | ‘I’m going to continue with my English language_ with my English because | I like language | because I am the most gifted linguist’ <1> yes? so these words are opposite <2> clear? <2> good | <2> can you give me <2> a stronger word for ‘although’? <9> a synonym of ‘although’ | but stronger <10> it’s all that list | that you have here | cause and effect | is_ everything is here | in this list
S: ‘even though’
The analysis of the transcript reveals that, in the first phase of the lesson, Monica follows a fairly stable pattern in “explaining” each connector. This pattern includes three cognitive processes that can be associated with the user type of competence:
_ Translating: what does it mean? | let’s do the translation
_ Producing samples according to a model or rule: for example, | ‘I am going to continue with my English in spite of the cost of these lessons’|
_ Referring to use or meaning: can you give me a stronger word for ‘although’? a synonym of ‘although’| but stronger
Although in her presentation of the topic the emphasis is mainly on the user type of knowledge, she also sporadically appeals to processes associated with the analyst type of competence:
_ Presenting rules as formulas: can you think, please? |what do we write after
‘although’? in | terms of syntax
_ Analyzing and labelling: ‘which’ refers to a word or a group of words in the
preceding sentence || it is usually the subject
From an interactional point of view, the informative type of move dominates the first phase of the lesson. Elicitations are rare in this first phase because the instructor is mainly “explaining” the different connectors. The instructor’s discourse involves mainly informative turns. The few elicitations found involve exclusively processes related to the user type of competence: translating, producing samples, and referring to use / meaning.
In accordance with the prominence of the user type of competence in the instructor’s explanation, there is also very little use of specialized metalanguage: word (16), opposite (10), sentence (8), subject (6), synonym (6), vocabulary (5) manner (3), noun (3), number (3), pronoun (3), question (3).
In the second phase, a sentence-completion exercise, the instructor’s participation takes the form of brief turns through which she evaluates or comments on the replies of the students. Such comments often involve one or both of the cognitive processes that we have defined as prescribing forms or translating:
‘in order | not to’ <1> ‘para no | tener que hacerlo mañana’ | ‘inorder | not to’ <1> so instead of | ‘in order to’ | ‘in order not to’ <1> ‘so as | not to’ <3> yes? <2> clear? Good <1> four <7> xxxx
‘on the contrary’ | that’s it <1> ‘al contrari’ | ‘on the contrary’ | ‘I hate football’ <6> ‘I hate football’ | mm | most people_
From an interactional point of view, the second phase includes even fewer elicitations than the first one since this type of move is already implicit in the activity: the students know that when it is their turn they must suggest a possible connector for the sentence in question. They use this move to realize a cognitive activity that we have identified as producing samples according to a model or rule. Therefore, the most frequent types of moves are reply, on the part of the students, and accept, evaluate and comment, on the part of the instructor.
