Knowledge construction in classroom: an analytical proposal for pedagogical interaction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26512/les.v18i3.7461Keywords:
Knowledge construction. Classroom discourse. Systemic Functional LinguisticsAbstract
This article offers an analytical proposal for the knowledge construction of the classroom discourses based on the model of language as a social semiotic offered by Systemic Functional Language studies. The article presents tools to distinguish a unit of analysis from the classroom discourse that is consistent and theoretically fundament (learning activity), as well as analytical tools of the knowledge construction based on the ideational metafunction. This proposal allows to explore how knowledge is constructed in different instances of classroom discourse, as well as to study different aspects of the way in which knowledge is constructed in pedagogical interaction.
Downloads
References
Berry, M. (1981). Systemic Linguistics and Discourse Analysis: a multi-layered approach to exchange structure. En M. Coulthard & M. M. Montgomery (Eds.), Studies in discourse analysis. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Carlino, P. (2004). El proceso de escritura académica: cuatro dificultades de la enseñanza universitaria. EDUCERE, 8(26), 321-327.
Carlino, P. (2013). Alfabetización académica diez años después. Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, 18(57), 355-381.
Christie, F. (2002). Classroom Discourse Analysis. A Functional Perspective. London: Continuum.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1995/2004). Language and the Reshaping of Experience. In J. J. Webster (Ed.), The Language of Science (Vol. 5, pp. 7-23). London: Continuum.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Routledge.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, M. I. M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (Third Edition ed.). London: Oxford University Press.
Harvey, A., & Oyanedel, M. (2010). El grupo de estudio: Conceptualización y actualización discursiva. In G. Parodi (Ed.), Alfabetización Académica y Profesional en el siglo XXI: Leer y escribir desde las disciplinas. Santiago: Ariel.
Hood, S. (2010). Appraising Research: Evaluation in Academic Writing. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Martin, J.R. (1992). English Text. System and Structure. Filadelfia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Martin, J.R. (1993) Technicality and Abstraction Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing Science. Literacy and Discursive Power. London: Routledge.
Martin, J. R. (2014). Exploring Content: Building Knowledge in School Discourse. Paper presented at the 8th International Free Linguistics Conference, Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse. Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum.
Moyano, E. I. (2014). La Discusión en artículos de microbiología: género, compromiso y construcción del conocimiento. Onomazein(Número especial IX ALSFAL), 161-185.
Parodi, G. (2009). El Corpus Académico y Profesional PUCV-2006: semejanzas y diferencias entre los géneros académicos y profesionales. Estudios Filológicos(44), 123-147.
Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to Write, Reading to Learn. London: Equinox.
Sabaj, O. (2012). Uso de movidas retóricas y patrones léxico-gramaticales en artículos de investigación en español. Implicancias para la enseñanza de la escritura científica. Boletín de Filología, XLVII(1), 165-186.
Wignell, P., Martin, J. R., & Eggins, S. (1993). The Discourse of Geography: Ordering and Explaining the Experiential World. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing Science. Literacy and Discursive Power (pp. 136-164). London: Routledge.