nach oben

Human Studies

Erschienen in:

01.11.2011 | Empirical Study

Interobjectivity and Interactivity: Material Objects and Discourse in Class

verfasst von: Herbert Kalthoff, Tobias Roehl

Erschienen in: Human Studies | Ausgabe 4/2011

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

In classroom teaching, material objects like the blackboard play an important role. Yet qualitative research on education has largely ignored this material dimension of education and focused on interaction and discourse. Both dimensions are, however, closely related to each other. Material objects are embedded in classroom discourse and are transformed into knowledge objects by speech acts, and in turn structure discussions and constitute a point of reference for school lessons. Drawing on ethnographic research on classroom lessons in mathematics and science classes in German high schools, we propose a perspective that recognizes both the materiality of teaching and its interactive dimension.

Vorheriger Artikel Forgiveness in Marriage: Healing or Chronicity. A Dialog Between a Philosophical and a Psychotherapeutic Understanding

Nächster Artikel Wilhelm Dilthey: Selected Works, Volume II: Understanding the Human World. Edited with Introduction by Rudolf A. Makkreel and Frithjof Rodi

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

After elementary school (grades 1–4) students enter the first phase of secondary school (grades 5–9/10) in one of three different types of school (Hauptschule, Realschule, Gymnasium) which are differentiated according to their emphasis on either practical or theoretical knowledge. The second phase of secondary school (grades 11–12/13) takes place in the Gymnasium only, leading to a higher education entrance qualification (Abitur).

The identities of our participants have been disguised using pseudonyms.

Cavalieri’s principle states (inter alia) that the volume of two prisms is equal, if the area of their bases and their height are equal.

In this paper, we limit our analysis to demonstration experiments and refrain from discussing hands-on experiments.

For an account of the history and the role of the blackboard in American mathematics teaching see Kidwell et al. (2008: 21–34).

Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is or—might be—the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25, 6–8.

Beauchamp, G., & Kennewell, S. (2010). Interactivity in the classroom and its impact on learning. Computers & Education, 54, 759–766.CrossRef

Bijker, W. E. (2010). How is technology made? That is the question! Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34, 63–76.CrossRef

Birmingham, P., Davies, C., & Greiffenhagen, C. (2002). Turn to face the bard: Making sense of three-way interactions between teacher, pupils and technology in the classroom. Education, Communication & Information, 2, 139–161.CrossRef

Bourdieu, P. (1979). Algeria 1960: The disenchantment of the world, the sense of honour, the Kabyle house or the world reversed: Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1981). Men and machines. In K. Knorr Cetina & A. Cicourel (Eds.), Advances in social theory and methodology: Toward an integration of micro- and macro-sociologies (pp. 304–317). Boston: Routledge.

Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture. London: Sage.

Brown, M. W. (2009). The teacher-tool relationship: Theorizing the design and use of curriculum materials. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann, & G. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 17–36). New York: Routledge.

Cerulo, K. A. (2009). Nonhumans in social interaction. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 531–552.CrossRef

Cobb, P. (2002). Reasoning with tools and inscriptions. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 187–215.

De Graaf, N. D., De Graaf, P. M., & Kraaykamp, G. (2000). Parental cultural capital and educational attainment in the Netherlands: A refinement of the cultural capital perspective. Sociology of Education, 73, 92–111.CrossRef

De Laet, M., & Mol, A. (2000). The Zimbabwe bush pump. Social Studies of Science, 30(2), 225–263.CrossRef

Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R.-L. (Eds.). (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2010). Actor-network theory in education. London: Routledge.

Fetzer, M. (2009). Objects as participants in classroom interaction. Paper presented at CERME 6—sixth conference of European research in mathematics education, January 28–February 1, in Lyon, France.

Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96, 606–633.CrossRef

Gumbrecht, H. U. (2004). Production of presence: What meaning cannot convey. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Hall, R., & Stevens, R. (1995). Making space: A comparison of mathematical work at school and in professional design practice. In S. L. Star (Ed.), The cultures of computing (pp. 118–145). Oxford: Blackwell.

Hammersley, M. (1976). The mobilisation of pupil attention. In M. Hammersley & P. Woods (Eds.), The process of schooling: A sociological reader (pp. 104–115). London: Routledge.

Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. New York: Harper & Row.

Ihde, D. (1990). Technology and the lifeworld: From garden to earth. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Joas, H. (1997). G. H. Mead: A contemporary re-examination of his thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Kaiser, G. (1999). Comparative studies on teaching mathematics in England and Germany. In G. Kaiser, E. Luna, & I. Huntley (Eds.), International comparisons in mathematics education (pp. 140–150). London: Falmer.

Kalthoff, H. (1997). Wohlerzogenheit. Eine Ethnographie deutscher Internatsschulen. Frankfurt/Main: Campus.

Kalthoff, H. (2004). Schule als Performanz. In S. Engler & B. Krais (Eds.), Das kulturelle Kapital und die Macht der Klassenstrukturen (pp. 115–140). München: Juventa.

Kalthoff, H. (2011). Social studies of teaching and education. Skizze einer sozio-materiellen Bildungsforschung. In D. Suber, H. Schäfer, & S. Prinz (Eds.), Pierre Bourdieu und die Kulturwissenschaften. Zur Aktualität eines undisziplinierten Denkens (pp. 107–131). Konstanz: UVK.

Kelly, G. J. (2007). Discourse in science classrooms. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 443–469). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kidwell, P. A., Ackerberg-Hastings, A., & Roberts, D.-L. (2008). Tools of American mathematics teaching, 1800–2000. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Knorr Cetina, K. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Kritt, D. W., & Winegar, L. T. (Eds.). (2007). Education and technology: Critical perspectives, possible futures. Lanham, MD: Lexington.

Latour, B. (1996). On interobjectivity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3, 228–245.CrossRef

Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Law, J. (2002). Objects and spaces. Theory, Culture & Society, 19(5–6), 91–105.CrossRef

Lawson, T., & Comber, C. (2000). Introducing information and communication technologies into schools: The blurring of boundaries. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21, 419–433.CrossRef

Leander, K. M. (2002). Locating Latanya: The situated practice of identity artifacts in classroom interaction. Research in the Teaching of English, 37, 198–250.

Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Lynch, M., & Macbeth, D. (1998). Demonstrating physics lessons. In J. G. Greeno & S. V. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 269–297). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Macbeth, D. (1994). Classroom encounters with the unspeakable. ‘Do you see, Danelle? Discourse Processes, 17, 311–335.CrossRef

McGregor, J. (2004). Spatiality and the place of the material in schools. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 12(3), 347–372.CrossRef

McHoul, A. (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society, 7, 183–213.CrossRef

McHoul, A. (1990). The organization of repair in classroom talk. Language in Society, 19, 349–377.CrossRef

Mead, G. H. (1972). Philosophy of the act. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Monahan, T. (2005). Globalization, technological change, and public education. New York: Routledge.

Payne, G., & Hustler, D. (1980). Teaching the class: The practical management of a cohort. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 1, 49–66.CrossRef

Pels, D., Hetherington, K., & Vandenberghe, F. (2002). The status of the object: Performances, mediations, and techniques. Theory, Culture & Society, 19, 1–21.CrossRef

Pinch, T., & Bijker, W. E. (1987). The social construction of facts and artifacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, & T. J. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology (pp. 17–51). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Remillard, J. T., Herbel-Eisenmann, B. A., & Lloyd, G. M. (Eds.). (2009). Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction. New York: Routledge.

Rheinberger, H.-J. (1997). Toward a history of epistemic things. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Roehl, T. (2012). Disassembling the classroom. An ethnographic approach to the materiality of education. Ethnography and Education, 7(1) (in press).

Roth, W.-M. (1998). Science and technology studies and science education: A natural match? Research in Science Education, 28, 1–7.CrossRef

Schliemann, A. D. (2002). Representational tools and mathematical understanding. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 301–317.

Selwyn, N. (2010). Looking beyond learning: Notes towards the critical study of educational technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 65–73.CrossRef

Smith, F., Hardman, F., & Higgins, S. (2007). Gender inequality in the primary classroom: Will interactive whiteboards help? Gender and Education, 19, 455–469.CrossRef

Sørensen, E. (2009). The materiality of learning: Technology and knowledge in educational practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stevens, R., & Hall, R. (1998). Disciplined perception: Learning to see in technoscience. In M. Lampert & M. L. Blunk (Eds.), Talking mathematics in school: Studies of teaching and learning (pp. 107–150). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vandenberghe, F. (2002). Reconstructing humants: A humanist critique of actant-network theory. Theory, Culture & Society, 19, 51–67.CrossRef

Vanderstraeten, R. (2001). The school class as an interaction order. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 22, 267–277.CrossRef

Verbeek, P.-P. (2005). What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. University Park, PA: Penn State Press.

Waltz, S. B. (2006). Nonhumans unbound. Actor-network theory and the reconsideration of ‘things’ in educational foundations. Educational Foundations, 20(3/4), 51–68.

Titel: Interobjectivity and Interactivity: Material Objects and Discourse in Class
verfasst von: Herbert Kalthoff
Tobias Roehl
Publikationsdatum: 01.11.2011
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Human Studies / Ausgabe 4/2011
Print ISSN: 0163-8548
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-851X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-011-9204-y

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2011

Equality in Difference: Hierarchical Multiculturalism and Membership Illusions

Habermas on Understanding: Virtual Participation, Dialogue and the Universality of Truth

Robert B. Pippin: Hegel on Self-Consciousness: Desire and Death in the Phenomenology of Spirit

Crossing the Finite Provinces of Meaning. Experience and Metaphor

Values, Knowledge and Solidarity: Neglected Convergences Between Émile Durkheim and Max Scheler

Patrick Sheil: Kierkegaard and Levinas: The Subjunctive Mood