Classroom discourse community assignment mau 3 đã chuyển đổi

Classroom Discourse: An Essential
Componentin Building a Classroom
Community
MalindaHoskinsLloyd,NancyJ.Kolodziej,andKathy
M.Brashears
Abstract
Basedonfindingsfromarecentqualitativestudyutilizinggroundedtheory
methodology,
in
thisessay,the authors focus on the building of communitywithintheclassroombyemphasizingclassroomdiscourseasanessential
component of instruction in exemplary teachers’ classrooms. The authors then
provide insights as to how to encourage and support classroomcom-munity
through
discourse,
defined
as
a
written
or
spoken
representationofone’sknowledge.Specifically,the authors present a progressive
approach—theFacilitate–Listen–Engage(FLE) model—designed to create a
discourse-intensivecommunityoflearners.Inthismodel,whichcanbeappliedtomultiple
contentareasandacrossvariousgradelevels,theteacher,servingastheFacilitator,intentionallyplanslessons,engagingstudentsindiscourse.Classroommembers
then participate in theListenphase in which teacher and students
cohesivelyexchangeinformationthroughbidirectionalcommunication.IntheEngagephase,theteacherp
urposefullyprovidesopportunitiesforstudentstoengage in rich discussions which
stimulate
the
development
ofcommunity.Ultimately,thisprogressiveframeworkisdesignedtoestablishasenseofbelongingforallstudentswhileactivelyengagingtheminthelearningprocess,forgingtheideat

hateverymemberoftheclassroomisvalued.Finally,theau-thors
describe
three
instructional strategies for promoting classroom discourse,supporting
practitioners as they translate theory intopractice.


School Community Journal, 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2
Available at />
291


SCHOOL COMMUNITY JOURNAL

KeyWords:classroomdiscourse,studentengagement,activelearning,communityoflearners,teacherasfacilitator,facilitate–listen–engage,dialogue

Introduction
Graspingcopiesofthebook,AcrossFiveAprils,afifthgradeteacherandsix
ofherstudentsgatherataroundtableinthebackoftheclassroom.Respondingtotheteacher’sutterance,“Arethesenotthemostexcitingtwochapters?
Tellmeinyourownwordswhathappened!,”astudentsays,“Myfavoritepart
was…”towhichtheteacherresponds,“Hah!Whywasthatimportant?”Withoutfurtherteacherprompting,otherstudentsaddtotheconversation,looking
intentlyatoneanotherastheyacknowledgeandexpandoneachother’scomments.Atonepointtheteacherinterjects,“Whateventshappenedbeforethisthatledyoutobeli
evethiswouldbetheoutcome?”Again,withoutadditional
teacherdirection,thestudentsconverseontopic.Listeningintently,theteachercomments,“Iwouldneverhavedreamedthathewouldgetaletterback!
Iwasshocked.Wereyou?”Repeatedly,eachstudent,independentoftheteacher,contributes to
the livelyconversation.
Thevignettedescribedabovewascapturedinthefieldnotesandobservationaldataofarecentqualitativestudy(Lloyd,2016).Whileobservingmultipleteachers
during
literacy
instruction

in
exemplary
schools,
researchersnotedseveralcommonalitiesamongtheteachers’practices,includingcreati
ngacommunityofrespectfulnessandtheextensiveengagementofstudentsinclassroomdiscourse.Int
hesewell-establishedlearningcommunities,studentdiscourse,
resultingfromcarefulplanningandteachertalk,wasapartoftheclassroom
cultureinwhichteachersclearlywelcomedstudentopinionsandquestionsandvalued a conversation-like
approach
to
classroom
dialogue.
According
to
KentandSimpson(2012),abenefitofsuchanapproachistheopportunityitpro- vides
teachers to better understand their students; in fact, they suggest
that“allowingstudentstimetodiscuss,analyze,andreflectonthereadinginsmall
groupsorpairs...isagreatwaytofacilitatecommunity”(p.30).Structuring
theclasstosupporttheserichconversationsorcommunity-buildingactivities
alsohelpspromoteasenseofbelongingwithintheclassroom(Chakraborty&
Stone,2010).Inthesesupportiveenvironments,teacherscanpurposefullypromoteindependentthinkingandself-efficacyamongtheirstudents.
Haney,Thomas,andVaughn(2011)discussthecomplexprocessofbuilding
communitywithintheclassroom;weechotheirstatementsbyurgingteacherstocreateclassroomdialogueanddevelopcommunitiesinwhichstudents
can“seethemselvesinothers”(p.55).Additionally,Haneyetal.advocatethatbuildingclassroomco
mmunity“fostersbelongingratherthanisolation”(pp.
292


56–57).Teachersinterestedinorchestratingclassroomdiscoursemaybenefit
fromimplementingthoughtfuldirectivesandquestionssuchasthoseshown in Figure1.

Directives

Questions

 topic or question)- Pair (with your neighbor to discuss)Think (about the
What are your thoughts about…?
Share (as a whole class)
 Where would you like to start your
explanation about…?
Turn and talk to your neighbor about...


How could you add on to what
said?

Pair up with someone
by sitting knee- to-knee or shoulder-to-shoulder
to
discuss…

Do you agree or disagree with what
said? Why?
Find someone in the room who
agrees/disagrees with you about…

How could we change the conversation
by sharing a different view about…?

Figure1.DirectivesandQuestionstoPromoteClassroomDiscourse.Thisfigurepresentsexamplesofdirectivesandquestionsthatfacilitatediscourse.

Discourse Defined Within the Context of Classroom Community
AsdefinedbyVandeWalle,Karp,Lovin,andBay-Williams(2014),class- room discourse
includes“theinteractions
between
all
the
participantsthatoccurthroughoutalesson”(p.20).Gonzalez(2008)furtherdefinesclassroom
discourseasanessentialcomponentoflearningthatincludesteacher–
studentinteractionsaswellasstudent–
studentinteractions.Becauseahealthyexchangeofideasmayincludeopposingviewpoints,itisneces
sarytocreateaclassroomcommunitythatisinclusiveandsupportiveofallitsmembers(Sanchez,2008).
Booker(2008)suggeststhatthistypeofsupportiveenvironmentisreciprocal in nature: “when students
are
allowed
to
voice
opinions,
collaborate…they
havemorepositiveviewsoftheclassenvironment”(p.13).
Although
classroom
discourse
may
include
students’
representationsofknowledgethroughbothwrittenandoralforms,forthescopeofthis
article, wewillfocusonoraldiscourse,alsoknownasdialogue,inthespiritoffoster-ing a sense
of community within theclassroom.

Approaches to Discourse

Ratherthanpromotinginteractive,student-tostudentdiscourse,teachersoftenuseatraditionalapproachknownastheInitiate–
Respond–Evaluate(IRE)


model (Gonzalez, 2008; Moss & Brookhart, 2009). In IRE interactions,the
teacherdominatesclassroomdiscussionbydeterminingthetopicofdiscussion,leadingtheconversation,initiatingquestions,andprovidingevaluativefeedback
to student responses. In this traditional structure of classroomdiscourse,teachersroutinelyimplementarapidfiringofquestionsonerightafteranotherwithoutprovidi
ngadequatetimeforresponsesorconversation(Moss & Brookhart, 2009). In addition, McElhone
(2013) asserts,“Fordecades, researchers and teachers have known that IRE
recitation
does
noteffectivelyengagestudentsorpromotedialogue…
butthesepatternsoftalkpersistin
manyclassrooms,perhapsbecauseteachershavetroubleenvisioninganden- acting alternatives”
(p.
12).Further,because
of
theteacher’sdominant
role
inleadingandguidingthediscussion,thetraditionalIREmodelperpetuates
teacherdictatedcommunication.Withthisassertioninmind,thevignetteat
thebeginningofthispapercapturesasignificantchangeinregardstoamore
progressive
discourseapproach.

The Facilitate-Listen-Engage (FLE) Model
“Althoughlifeintheclassroomisasocialexperience,itdoesnotnecessar- ily constitute a
community”
(Meltzoff,
1994,p.260).

The
preceding
quote
supportsthecallforenactinganapproachmoreconducivetoestablishingcommunityintheclassroomthroughdiscourse.King(1997)advocatesforcreating“mutualenterprises”
(p.
68) to encourage the sense of belonging for acom- munityoflearners.Haneyetal.
(2011)proposethenotionofahealthyschool
culturepromptedby“continuousdialogueconductedonmutuallyconstructed
ground”
(p.
57).Further,Meltzoff (1994) characterizes communicationandresponsiveness
as
quintessential
components
of
a
classroomcommunity.Basedonastudyonparentalinvolvement,BennettConroy(2012)assertedthatthe
qualityofhomeworkassignmentsaswellasthefrequencyofcompletingthe
assignmentssignificantlyincreasedasaresultofatleastfiveminutesofbidirectionalconversationswithparents.Thisbidirectionalmodelsetsthestageforestablis
hingteacher–studentandstudent–studentdialogueaswell,thusallowingstudentstobecomeequalandactiveparticipantswiththeirteachersand
peersasopposedtoamoreverticalapproachinwhichstudentsarepassiveparticipantswhoonlyreceiveinformation.Additionally,weechoHaneyetal.’scallforestablishin
gasenseofconnectednessamongstudentsasopposedtohaving
somestudentsremaininvisibleintheclassroom,highlighting“thegroup’scollectivemissiontolearn,grow,andappreciateeachother”(p.69).
Inaddition,weencouragetheenrichmentofstudents’personalcompetencieswithinthecontextofaschoolculture(Redding,2014).Thesecompetencies


can be enhanced by expanding on astudent’spotential to grow
asa learnerandbyviewingthisPersonalCompetencyFrameworkasdescribedbyRedding(2014)asparto
ftheacademiccurriculum.Particularly,weemphasizethevalueof the metacognitive competency
through which students

thinka b o u t theirthinkingandindependentlyapplylearningstrategiestoself-regulateormonitortheirlearning.Withrespecttotheacademiccurriculum,Reddingarguesthat selfregulation—viewed as a tool that can be taught, learned,andprac-ticed—
isacomponentofmetacognitionwhichcanboostthelearningprocess.Asaresult,weproposeteach
ersdeviatefromthetraditionalInitiate–Re-spond–Evaluate(IRE) model and
implement an innovativeframeworkforestablishing classroom discourse,
theFacilitate–Listen–
Engage(FLE) model.Imaginetheteacher’sroleinthismodelasrepresentativeof“horizo
ntalcommunication”asopposedto“verticalcommunication.”Forexample,usingtheanalogyofhorizo
ntalcommunication,envisionalevelhorizontalplanewithspeakers, namely the teacher
and students, conversing
asequalcontributorsinacohesivedialogue,independentintheirthinkingandc
ontributions.Incontrast,thetraditionalIREmodelperpetuatesverticalcommunicationhigh
lightedbythestudents’submissiveandpassiveroleinclassroomdialogue.InourproposedFLEm
odel,theteacherandstudentengageinareciprocalexchange of information.
ContrarytothetraditionalIREmodel,theFLEmodelplacesstudentsparalleltotheteacher,creatingacontextforareciprocalexchangeofinformation.Additionally, the
members
of
the
classroom
community
learn
to
valueeachothers’voicesandbecomeactivereceiversandsharersofnewknowledge(Meltzoff,1994).AlthoughinthenextsectionswepresenttheFLEmodelasthree
separateentities,theFacilitate,Listen,andEngagephasesaremorecyclical
andrecursiveinnatureastheteacher,actingasfacilitator,promoteshorizontaldiscoursethroughtheseseamlesslyinterwovenstages.Thefollowingquotesetsthestageforanapproach
toclassroomdiscoursewhichplacesthelearner at theforefront:
Astudent’scapacitytolearngrowsnaturallythroughtheexperienceof
schooling,justasaroguestalkofcornwillsproutfromanunattended
seed,
stretching toward the sun. Like a plant that is watered andnurtured,however,astudent’scapacitytolearnwillburstforthwhenteach- ers feed its roots
(Redding, 2014,p.9).

SeeFigure2foracomparisonofthetraditionalapproachversusthemorepro-gressive
approach to classroomdiscourse.


Traditional Approach
Initiate-Respond-Evaluate (IRE) Model

Progressive Approach
Facilitate-Listen-Engage (FLE) Model



Teacher-dominated



Student-centered



Teachertalk invokes teacher-to-student
discourse



Teachertalk promotes student-to-student
discourse



Teacherdetermines topic and controls
interactions



Student-to-student discourse creates a supportive
classroomcommunity



Teacherposes a question, students respond,
and teacher provides some type of quick
feedback



Students are given opportunities for
“demonstrating communicative competency”
(Gonzalez,2008)



Verticalcommunication



Horizontalcommunication

Imbalance of power (Moss & Brookhart,
2009)



Balance between teacher talk and studenttalk



Students share in conversation-like dialogue and
identify themselves as viable members of their
learningcommunity




Students are accustomed to speaking only
when invited to do so (Moss & Brookhart,
2009)

Figure2.AComparisonofApproachestoClassroomDiscourse.Thisfigurecompares
the IRE model to the FLEmodel.

Facilitate
ThefirstphaseoftheFLEmodelistheFacilitatephaseinwhichtheteacher
laysthefoundationforenactingtheListenandEngagephases.IntheFacilitate
phase,theteacherveersfromtheroleofa“conduitofinformation”(Meltzoff,
1994,p.259)andassumesthepositionofacommunitybuilder.Specifically,theteacherpla
nsstrategiesandquestionswiththeclearintentionofengaging
studentsindiscourseandcreatingasenseofcommunitywithintheclassroom.Inthiscontext,theteac
hercreatesgroupsoflearnerswhicharenonexclusive
andhavecharacteristicsofanegalitariansociety(King,1997).Teachersmodel

forthestudentsandprovideopportunitiestodeveloprelationalskills,whichwillbeusedinp
ublicsectorslaterinlife.Inessence,assuggestedbyMeltzoff,
theteacheractsasatourguideleadingstudentsthroughaninteractiveprocess
oflearning.ActingasthefacilitatorthroughouteachphaseoftheFLEmodel,
theteacher,throughreflectionandcarefulconstructionoflessons,plansliteracyinstructionthatpurposelyengagesstudentsintopic-relatedconversations.
SeeFigure3forrecommendationsforimplementingtheFacilitatephase.


Add a section to your lesson plan format that specifically and intentionally plans for classroo
Begin planning for classroom discourse by first reflecting on a lesson you have recently tau
Construct opportunities for classroom discourse that allow students to demonstrate mastery
Understand that discourse does not have to consume extensive amounts of your lesson. D

Figure3.RecommendationsforImplementingtheFacilitatePhaseoftheFLE Model. This figure
provides recommended starting points for the teachertoimplement the Facilitate phase of
the FLEModel.

Listen
During the Listen phase of the FLE model, the teacher and the students
are committed to listening to each others’ comments. As quoted by Bryant
H.McGill,“Oneofthemostsincereformsofrespectisactuallylisteningto
what
another has tosay”(2014, para. 1).Bycreating a community oflearnerswholistentoothers,theteacher,acoparticipant,establishesanexpectation
ofrespectwithintheclassroom.Theteacher’sroleaslistenerprovidestheopportunityforformativeassessmentasstudentsexplaintheirthoughts,reason
critically,justifyresponses,and“argue”withpeers.Asteachersactivelylisten
tostudents’conversations,theyestablishasenseofshared“voiceofauthority”(Cazden & Beck, 2003,
p.180).
In addition, while listening, students develop a “dynamic understanding
that is collaboratively constructed in discussion among students”(Cazden&
Beck, 2003, p. 165). Using a balance scale to illustrate, the teacher and

students are equal participants in classroom discourse, with eachrepresenting equal“weights”in terms of classroom dialogue. In other words, inboth
teacher–studentandstudent–studentdiscourse,theparticipants(teacherand/
orstudents)naturallyserveasbothspeakersandlisteners.

Engage
The third phase of the FLE model, which occurs concurrently with the
Listenphase,isEngage.MuchlikeRichardsonandSt.Pierre’s(2005)assertionthat“writingisthinking”(p.967),engaging inconversationisalsoa


waystudentscandemonstratethinking.Infact,engagingindialogueprovidesstudents
with
opportunities
to
communicate,
giving
voice
to
theirthoughtprocessesandshowingrespectfortheopinionsofothers.Inregardstoagiven
conceptortopic,MossandBrookhart(2009)furtherassertthatengagingin
dialogue,ratherthanthinkinginisolation,helpsstudentsassesstheirownun-derstanding.
Students learn by engaging in more authentic tasks, including
speakingandlistening,whichparallelthoseneededbyproductivecitizensinaglobalcommunity(Melt
zoff,1994).TheEngagephasehighlightsthesebene-fitsofteacher–studentandstudent–
studentinteractionsandisanintegralpartof the recursive FLE model (see Figure4).

Figure4.TheFacilitate–Listen–
Engage(FLE)Model.Thisfigureillustratestheroleoftheteacherasthefacilitatorandrepresentst
hehorizontalcommunica- tion established throughout the FLEModel.

Community-Building Strategies for Promoting Discourse

Meltzoff(1994)characterizestheroleoftheteacherasonewhoskillfullyweavesteachingandlearning,createsaninterconnectednessamonglesson concepts, and guides
students
in
developing
rich
relationships
within
the
classroom.Inaddition,teachingshouldbeabidirectionalprocessbetweenstudentsandteachers.Whileengagingstudentsindiscourse,itisimperativeforteacherstoack
nowledgeindividualdifferencesofstudentswhilecreatinganinterconnectedness
within
the
classroom.Todo
this,
we
share
thefollowingthreestrategiesaspracticalimplementationoftheFLEModelandasawayof


promotingcommunityanddiscourseintheclassroom—Inner–
OuterCircle,Numbered HeadsTogether,and DiscussionWebs.

Inner–Outer Circle
Inner–OuterCircleisahighlyversatilediscoursestrategythatcanbeaseg-ment
of
a
planned lesson or that can be spontaneously implemented at any
pointinalesson.TofacilitatetheInner–OuterCircleactivity,directyourstudentstocountoffbysaying“1,2,1,2,”andsoon,withthe“1s”representing
theinnercirclemembers,andthe“2s”representingtheouter-circlemembers.
Instructthe1stocreateacircle,withallstudentsfacingoutwardfromthecircle(seeFigure5).Next,directthe2stocreateanothercircleoutsidethefirstwitheachstude

ntfacinganinnercirclemember.Poseaquestionortopicfordiscussionandprovideampletimeforstudentstoe
ngageinactivediscussion.
Next,whiletheinnercirclemembersremainintheirplaces,havetheoutercirclemembersrotatethecirclecounterclockwisesothateachpersonwillbestandingacross
fromanewinner-circlemember.Eitherdirectthestudentsto
discussthesamepromptorposeanewpromptfordiscussion.
Inner–OuterCirclepromotesactivediscussioninasecure,one-on-oneset-ting within the
classroomcommunity,allowing
students
to
leave
theirseatsandengageindiscoursewiththeirpeers.Itsversatilityallowsittobeusedas
anintroductiontoanewtopic,aquestion-and-answersession,orareviewfor
alessonorunit.Inner–
OuterCircleisaneasilyimplementedstrategyandisbeneficialasanimpromptuactivity
duringthosemomentswhenstudentsap-pearlethargicorhesitanttorespondinawholeclasssetting.


Figure 5. Inner–Outer Circle Formation. This figure illustrates thearrangementofstudentsduringtheInner–OuterCirclestrategywith“1s”formingtheinner
circle
and“2s”forming the outercircle.


Numbered Heads Together
Numbered HeadsTogether(NHT) holds all students accountable for respondingtoagivenquestionorprompt,promotingactivestudent-to-student
discourse.Researchers(Maheady,Michielli-Pendl,Mallette,&Harper,2002)
foundthatanaverageof98%ofstudentsrespondedtoquestionsposedusing
theNHTstrategyascomparedto15%ofstudentsthatrepliedtowhole-class,
teacherledquestioning.Theteacheractsasthefacilitatorbypreplanningques- tions and/or prompts forNHT,setting the
stage for students to engage in meaningfuldiscourse.
Tofacilitate the NHTstrategy,cluster students into groups offour.Then,

assigneachstudentinthegroupanumberfromonetofour(seeFigure6).Tellstudentsthatallgr
oupmembersmustputtheir“headstogether”toengageinadiscussionaboutthequestion,lis
tentotheirpeers,decideuponthebestanswer,andverifythateachgroupmemberispreparedtorespond.Presentthe
entireclasswiththequestion,andthengiveadequatetimetodiscussthere-sponse.
Next, randomly call on one of the numbers, directing students who
wereassignedthisnumbertoraisetheirhands.Calloneachofthesestudents
torespondtothequestionuntilacompleteandsufficientresponseisobtained.Tomaintainanatmosphereo
ffairness,usearandomizationmethodtochoosethenumbers,suchaspullingpopsiclesticks
withnumbers1through4writtenonthemorbyusingarandomnumbergeneratorapp.Forexample,ifthe
teacherdrawsthenumber2,allstudentswhowerea2shouldrespondtothe
question.DuringtheNumberedHeadsTogetherstrategy,besuretovarythe numbers
so all students have a chance torespond.

1

2

4

3
Figure6.TheNumberedHeadsTogether(NHT)Strategy.Thisfigurerepresents student
roles during teacher-facilitated discussions, with each student beingassignedanumberandbeingaccountableforparticipatinginthediscussions.


Discussion Webs
DiscussionWebsare
ideal
for
facilitating
opinion-oriented

discussions.Thegraphic organizer in Figure 7 is an example of a
DiscussionWebactivityin
whichstudentsreflectonaquestion,discussopinionswithpartners,andthen
presenttheirideastotheclass.Forexample,afterreadingthebookHey,LittleAnt(Hoose,
Hoose, &Tilley,1998), students use this organizer tofacilitate
discourseandengageinhigherlevelthinkingtoanswerquestionsfromtheper-spectivesofbothmaincharacters—
thelittleboywhowasgoingto“squish”theantandthelittleboywhopleadedforhislife.Asad
vocatedintheCommon
CoreStateStandards,DiscussionWebspromotecriticalthinkingandprovideastructureforstu
dentsto“evaluateothers’pointsofviewcriticallyandcon- structively” (NGA & CCSSO,
2010, p.7).

YES

Should the boy squish the ant?
NO

Conclusion

Figure7.DiscussionWebGraphicOrganizer.ThisgraphicorganizerisastudenthandoutthatisusedtofacilitatetheDiscussionWebstrategy.
TobegintheDiscussionWebstrategy,directstudentstoindependentlywrite
theirresponsesinatleastoneofthe“Yes”or“No”boxesontheweb.Then,
placestudentswithapartneranddirectthemtofillinasmanyofthe“Yes”and“No”boxesaspossible,discu
ssingrationaleforbothsidesoftheargument,regardlessoftheirpersonalstances.Tellthestudentstodiscuss,ratherthansimply
read,theirresponses.Next,combinepairsofstudentstoformgroupsoffour students, and
prompt each group to discuss their ideas, addingpeers’informationtotheirwebs.Afterwards,engagestudentsinawhole-classdiscussion


abouttheresponsesontheirwebs.Finally,provideafewminutesforstudents
toindependentlyreflectontheinputoftheirpeersandwriteapersonalconclusionontheirwebs.TheDiscussionWebstrategycanculminateatthispoint,or

thecompletedwebscanbeusedasabasisforavarietyoffollow-upactivities,
includingadebate,televisionorradioadvertisement,orwrittenresponse.

Closing Thoughts for Achieving Classroom
CommunityThrough Discourse
Withoutquestion,theFLEmodelprovidesasoundframeworkforteacherstoconsiderastheyestablishaclassroomenvironmentconducivetostudent discourse and rich
incommunity.The
importance
of
planning
foreffectiveclassroomdiscourseis,perhaps,besthighlightedbyGonzalez(2008):“Or
alcommunicationis…thesinglemostimportantvehicleofinteractionbetweenteacher
and students, as well as among students.Itis also the
principalwaythroughwhichlearningisdemonstrated”(p.139).Pohan(2003)assertsteacher
educatorsshouldabandontraditionalapproachesandstriveforcommunityrichclassroomsthatequipyouth“withtheknowledge,skills,anddispositions
neededforeffectiveandproductiveparticipationinanincreasinglydiversesociety”(p.370).Toscaffoldthisendeavor,weencouragetheimplementationof
theFLEcomponents—
Facilitate,Listen,andEngage.Wehaveidentifiedand described three strategies—Inner–Outer Circle,
Numbered
HeadsTogether,andDiscussionWebs—
thatcanbeutilizedwiththeFLEmodel,thuspromot- ing rich and thoughtful communicative
competency instudents.

References
Bennett-Conroy,W.(2012).Engagingparentsofeighthgradestudentsinparent–teacherbidirectionalcommunication.SchoolCommunityJournal,22(2),87–110.Retrievedfromhttp://
www.schoolcommunitynetwork.org/SCJ.aspx
Booker, K. (2008). The role of instructors and peers in establishing classroom community.
Journal of Instructional Psychology,35(1), 12–16.
Cazden,C.B.,&Beck,S.W.(2003).Classroomdiscourse.InA.C.Graesser,M.A.Gernsbacher,&S.R.Goldman(Eds.),Handbookofdiscourseprocesses(pp.165–197).Mahwah,NJ:
LawrenceErlbaum.

Chakraborty,B.,&Stone,S.(2010).Classroomidea-sparkers:Buildingcommunitywiththe
“important
book.”Childhood Education, 86(3),168G–168J.
Gonzalez, J. M. (2008).Encyclopedia of bilingual education. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Haney,K.G.,Thomas,J.,&Vaughn,C.(2011).Identitybordercrossingswithinschoolcommunities,precursorstorestorativeconferencing:Asymbolicinteractioniststudy.SchoolCommunity
Journal, 21(2), 55–80. Retrieved from />

Hoose, P. M., Hoose, H., & Tilley, D. (1998).Hey, little ant. Berkeley, CA: Tricycle Press.
Kent, A., & Simpson, J. (2012). The power of literature: Establishing and enhancing the
young adolescent classroom community.Reading Improvement, 49(1), 28–32.
King,N.R.(1997).Playandcommunityintheclassroom.SchoolCommunityJournal,7(2),65–76.
Retrieved from />Lloyd, M. (2016). Commonalities among exemplary teachers.Literacy Practice
andResearch,41(3), 17–22.
Maheady,L.,Michielli-Pendl,J.,Mallette,B.,&Harper,G.
(2002).Acollaborativeresearchprojecttoimprovetheacademicperformanceofadiversesixthgradescienc
eclass.TeacherEducation and Special Education, 25(1),55–70.
McElhone,D.
(2013).Pressingforelaborationinstudenttalkabouttexts.JournalofClassroomInteraction,48(1),4–
14.
McGill,B.(2014).Oneofthemostsincereformsofrespectislistening.[SimpleReminders quote by author.]
Retrieved from />Meltzoff,N.(1994).Relationship,thefourth“R”:Thedevelopmentofaclassroomcommunity.SchoolCommunityJournal,4(2),259–274.Retrievedfrom />Moss,C.M.,&Brookhart,S.M.(2009).Advancingformativeassessmentineveryclassroom:Aguide
for
instructional leaders. Alexandria,VA:ASCD.
NationalGovernorsAssociationCenterforBestPractices(NGA)&CouncilofChiefStateSchool
Officers (CCSSO). (2010).Common core state standards for
Englishlanguageartsandliteracyinhistory/socialstudies,science,andtechnicalsubjects.Washington,DC:Aut
hors.Pohan,C.(2003).Creatingcaringanddemocraticcommunitiesinourclassroomsandschools.
Childhood Education, 79(6), 369–373.
Redding,S.
(2014).Personalcompetency:Aframeworkforbuildingstudents’capacitytolearn.Philadelphia,PA:C

enteronInnovationsinLearningatTempleUniversity.Retrievedfrom />publications/Personal_Compentency_Framework.pdf
Richardson, L., & St. Pierre, E. (2005). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. Denzen &
Y.Lincoln (Eds.),The Sage handbook of qualitative research(pp. 959–978). Thousand
Oaks,CA: Sage.
Sanchez,R.(2008).Integratingcommunityinculturallyconscientiousclassrooms.EducationDigest,63(7),53–57.
VandeWalle,J.A.,Karp,K.S.,Lovin,L.H.,&Bay-Williams,J.M.(2014).Teachingstudent-centered mathematics:
Developmentally appropriate instruction for grades 3–5(2nd ed.). Bos-ton, MA:Pearson.

Withover25yearsinthefieldofeducation,MalindaHoskinsLloydisan
assistantprofessorandcurrentlyteachesorhastaughtliteracy,mathematics,andscience
methodscoursesatTennesseeTechnologicalUniversity.Dr.Lloyd’scurrentresearchint
erestsincludebestpracticesinliteracyinstruction,thehis-tory of reading instruction,
undergraduate
teacher
education
programs,
and
thecomparisonofpedagogicalknowledgetobackgroundexperienceinteachers.CorrespondenceconcerningthisarticlemaybeaddressedtoDr.Malinda
Hoskins
Lloyd,TennesseeTechnological University,Department of Curric- ulum &
Instruction,
Box
5042,
Cookeville,
TN
38505,
or

Nancy Kolodziej has been teaching undergraduate and
graduatecoursesinliteracyatTennesseeTechnologicalUniversitysince2004.Prio
rtoteach-ing at the university level, she taught grades K through 8 in
California and Pennsylvania.Dr.Kolodziej’sresearchinterestsincludeteachereducationand
instructionalpracticesforteachingliteracy.
A
former
elementary
teacher
and
principal,
Kathy
BrashearscurrentlyservesasaprofessoratTennesseeTechnologyUniversitywheresheteache
slit-eracy
courses
for
both
undergraduate
and
graduate
students.Dr.Brashear’sresearchandpublicationsfocusprimarilyonstudentliteracypracticesandcu
l-turalawareness.