PRESCHOOL CHILDREN'S VERBAL COMMUNICATION WITHIN TWO DIFFERENT CLASSROOM SETTINGS

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 61, 466 - 476, 01.04.2017

Zübeyde Doğan Altun Ithel Jones

https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.304686

Öz

This study investigated the effects of two different classroom contexts, sociodramatic play and a teacher led activity, on children’s use of verbal communication. Additionally, the effect of children’s gender on their use of verbal communication was examined. Participants in the study were 24 children between the ages of 37 and 55 months old, who were attending two preschools located in the northern part of the state of Florida, USA. The data collection was completed through observation of children’s play and teacher-led reading-retelling-drawing activities. Children were observed on two occasions for each activity, and the total observation time was 40 minutes per child. Sociometric Interview, Leaper’s (1991) discourse patterns categories, and Halliday’s (1973) seven types of language demands were used as instruments to collect data in the study. Data analyses were completed by using Descriptive and repeated measurements and ANOVA statistical techniques. According to the findings, children use language to serve a variety of functions during different classroom activities. In the play context (open) language is used mostly to serve imaginative and interactional functions. In the closed-field context, where the interaction was led by the teacher, the most common language function used by the children was informative language. Five out of seven (Regulatory, personal, imaginative, informative, interactional); and one out of four discourse patterns (Control) were used in different frequencies within play and teacher contexts.

 

 

PRESCHOOL CHILDREN'S VERBAL COMMUNICATION WITHIN TWO DIFFERENT CLASSROOM SETTINGS [en]

Öz

Kaynakça

• Aram, D., & Levin, I. (2001). Mother-child joint writing in low SES: Sociocultural factors maternal mediation, and emergent literacy. Cognitive Development, 16, 831-852.
• Black, B. & Hazen, N.L. (1990). Social status and patterns of communication in acquainted and unacquainted preschool children. Developmental Psychology, 26,
• DeZutter, S. (2007). Play as group improvisation: A social semiotic, multimodal perspective on play and literacy. In O. N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on Social learning in early childhood education (pp.217-244). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
• Dickinson, D. K., & Neuman, S.B. (2006). In D. K. Dickinson & S. B. Neuman (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 1-11). New York: The Guilford Press.
• Dickinson, D.K., & Sprague, K.E. (2001). The natural and impact of early childhood care environments on language and early literacy development of children from low income families. In D. K. Dickinson & S. B. Neuman (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 263-281). New York: The Guilford Press.
• Feng, S. & Benson (2007). The language patterns of preschool children in computer environment. Journal of Research in Early Childhood Education, 21, 4, 341-351.
• Gleason, T.R., Gower, A.L., Gleason, T.C., & Hohmann, L.M. (2005). Temperament and friendship in preschool-aged children. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 4, 336-344.
• Green, J., & Meyer, L. (1991). The embeddedness of reading in classroom life: Reading as a situated process. In C. Baker & A. Luke (Eds.), The critical sociology of reading pedagogy (pp. 141-160). The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
• Halliday, M. & Hasan, R. (1985). Language context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Deakin, Vic.: Deakin University Press.
• Halliday, M. (1973). Explorations in the function of the language. London: Edward.
• Kress, G. (1997). Before writing: Rethinking the paths to literacy. London: Routledge. Kress, G. (2003). Perspectives on making meaning: The differential principles and meanings of adults and children. In N. Hall, J. Larson, & J. Marsh (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood literacy (pp. 154-166). London: Sage Publications.
• Lave J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Leaper, C. (1991). Influence and involvement in children’s discourse: Age, gender, and partner effects, Child Development, 62, 797-811.
• Leaper, C. (2000). Gender, affiliation, assertion, and interactive context of parent-child play Developmental Psychology, 36, 381-393.
• Leaper, C. & Smith,T.E. (2004). A Meta-Analytic review of gender variations in children’s language use: Talkativeness, affiliative speech, and assertive speech. Developmental Psychology, 40, 993-1027.
• MacLachlan, C. (2007). Emergent literacy. In L. Makin, C.J. Diaz, & C. MacLachlan, C. (Eds.), Literacy in childhood: Changing views, challenging practice (pp. 15-31). Australia: Elsevier.
• McCandless, B. R., & Marshall, H. R. (1957). A Picture sociometric technique for preschool children and its relation to teacher judgments of friendship. Child Development, 28, 2, 140-147.
• Murphy, S.M., Faulkner, D. (2006). Gender differences in verbal communication between popular and unpopular children during interactive task. Social Development, 15, 1, 82-108.
• Neuman, S. B., & Dickinson D. K. (2001). Handbook of early literacy research. New York: the Guilford press
• Pellegrini, A.D., & Blatchford, P. (2000). The child at school: Interactions with peers and teachers. London, England: Arnold.
• Pellegrini, A.D., Melhuish, E., Jones, I., Trojanowska, L., & Gilden, R. (2000). Social context of learning literate language: The role of varied, familiar, and close relationships. Learning and Individual differences, 12, 375-389.
• Pianta, R.C. (2006). Teacher child relationships and early literacy learning. In D.K.
• Plowman, L., & Stephen, C. (2005). Children, play, and computers in preschool
• Razfar, A. & Gutierrez, K. (2003). Reconceptualizing early childhood literacy: The sociocultural influence. In Hall, N., Larson, J., Marsh, J. (Eds.). Handbook of Early Childhood Literacy (pp. 34-49). London: Sage.
• Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Siegel, M. (2006). Rereading the signs: Multimodal transformations in the field of literacy education. Language Arts, 84 (1). September, pages 65-77.
• Snow, C.E., Burns, M.S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
• Street, B. (1995). Social Literacies. Longman: London.
• Teale, W. H., & Sulzby, E. (1986). Introduction: Emergent literacy as a perspective for examining how young children become writers and readers. In W. H. Teale & E. Sulzby (Eds.), Emergent literacy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
• Wertsch, J.V. (1995). The need for action in sociocultural research. In J.V. Wertsch, P. del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 56-74). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Yaden, D., Rowe, D., & MacGillivray, L. (2000). Emergent literacy: A matter of (polyphony) of perspectives. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 425–454). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.