Research has shown that a dialogic approach to teaching improves learners’ ability to reason, argue, analyse, and collaborate, which results in better learning outcomes. Dialogue also allows teachers to more easily identify and correct learners’ misconceptions and contributes to increasingly effective posing of questions of higher cognitive levels. The effects of dialogue are therefore significant, which is why it is important for pre-service mathematics teachers to be properly educated in this area, so that they will be able to adequately support learners in achieving learning objectives. In the theoretical section of this master’s thesis, the direct and dialogic approaches are presented, which, with their similarities and differences, significantly influence the course and quality of teaching and complement each other in instruction. The principles of dialogue are presented, as well as a review of research which highlights the positive changes that take place in the classroom when using the dialogic approach to teaching. Furthermore, three types of knowledge, essential for successful learning of mathematics, are outlined: surface, deep, and transfer knowledge. Various categorizations of questions found in professional literature are also presented, followed by a chapter defining mathematical language and the types of words it consists of. In the empirical section of the master’s thesis, we aimed to determine whether pre-service teachers are supportive when guiding dialogue and how they demonstrate their support. We were interested in whether any differences in their supportive responses arise depending on whether the learner’s answer is correct or incorrect. We were also interested in which types of questions pre-service teachers pose more frequently (both from the perspective of the knowledge they foster in learners and from the perspective of guiding them in acquiring knowledge), and whether these questions are terminologically and linguistically appropriate. Based on content analysis of transcribed dialogues and quantitative processing of collected data, we found that pre-service teachers are aware of the importance of support when teaching. They mostly demonstrated their support with responses which encourage learners’ further reflection, such as elaborating, justifying, or supplementing their answers. We observed that, when responding to incorrect answers of learners, they more frequently encouraged explanation and deeper understanding than when responding to correct answers. At the same time, we found that there was more unexploited potential for support in pre-service teachers’ responses to incorrect answers than in their responses to the correct ones. Through the analysis of questions, we found that pre-service teachers mostly pose questions that encourage the development of learners’ surface knowledge, while from the perspective of guiding learners, they predominantly pose guiding questions. We also found that a considerable share of the questions was terminologically questionable and that they were often phrased in colloquial language, which reduces their academic value. Based on the collected data, we propose that particular attention in the education of pre-service teachers be given to terminological and linguistic accuracy of expression, as well as to the importance of questions that foster the development of deep knowledge and to the use of guiding questions, through which teachers can follow learners’ thinking. In this way, support in dialogue could also be improved, and the potential of responses used more effectively.
|
