It is evident that the teacher's response, whether accepting or rejecting student's responses, is very important. I've seen in this observation that for example a response can redirect students when an incorrect answer is given or when they don't understand the question in the first place. What's more, the teacher can give a partial acceptance to the child's response, ask them to rethink their answer or ask for more information as in the third example shown in the chart above.
Again, it is clearly important because I think this could help students reach a higher level of achievement. I imagine that if we give them critical or vague responses such as
"No, that's not right" or just "No", they will most likely never try to participate again.
However, we have to know when to elicit and how. Students should have the chance to speculate, manipulate and imagine the information being presented. I don't know if eliciting can be randomly done. Children need explicit instructions, guidance and like I said, give them credit for their contributions right or wrong, which as I see, didn't happened in the second example above. The teacher was clearly looking for an specific response and didn't accept the answer given by the student, that's why I wrote it was rejected.
Of course as in every class some students didn't even bother to open their books or participate in class but as a whole, the students were engaged in the activities and they were able to share their knowledge about the topic. In most cases children don't even try to share their opinion because they're afraid of being picked on because of it or just for the mere fact of being wrong. But here I observed they weren't afraid to participate again even after the teacher's response. In some moments, example number four, it felt as if they were playing a guessing game. It came to my mind maybe that's why they were participative.
Generally, it depends on the teacher. Some of them accept only the answer they want or expect but some of them value every single contribution. In this case, the teacher accepted most of the answers and encouraged students to speak freely. I personally believe that's the way it should be, we should guide responses to "go beyond".
Again, it is clearly important because I think this could help students reach a higher level of achievement. I imagine that if we give them critical or vague responses such as
"No, that's not right" or just "No", they will most likely never try to participate again.
However, we have to know when to elicit and how. Students should have the chance to speculate, manipulate and imagine the information being presented. I don't know if eliciting can be randomly done. Children need explicit instructions, guidance and like I said, give them credit for their contributions right or wrong, which as I see, didn't happened in the second example above. The teacher was clearly looking for an specific response and didn't accept the answer given by the student, that's why I wrote it was rejected.
Of course as in every class some students didn't even bother to open their books or participate in class but as a whole, the students were engaged in the activities and they were able to share their knowledge about the topic. In most cases children don't even try to share their opinion because they're afraid of being picked on because of it or just for the mere fact of being wrong. But here I observed they weren't afraid to participate again even after the teacher's response. In some moments, example number four, it felt as if they were playing a guessing game. It came to my mind maybe that's why they were participative.
Generally, it depends on the teacher. Some of them accept only the answer they want or expect but some of them value every single contribution. In this case, the teacher accepted most of the answers and encouraged students to speak freely. I personally believe that's the way it should be, we should guide responses to "go beyond".