Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

[[alternative]]The Equality of Peer Interactions in Scientific Group Discussions :From the Perspective of Expectation States Theory

By [[author]]邱旻昇, [[author]]Min-Sheng Chiu, 邱旻昇 and Min-Sheng Chiu


[[abstract]]The purpose of the study was to analyze the equality of peer interactions in different kinds of group discussions from the perspective of expectation states theory(E.S.T.). The study began with a literature review from sociology, social psychology, cooperative learning, sociometry and discussed the possible situations in students' interacions which were applied into discussing the equality of interactions within group. Finally, the researcher tried to find the way improving the equality within group. Based on the discussions above, the researcher took two kinds of teaching approaches in the empirical study--the first was controlled teaching and peer discussions, the second was experimental teaching and peer discussions--and collected data in the forms of audio and video tape-recording. The findings of this study were summarized as follows: 1. The classroom structures of two classes were still stable after this study. And the correlation of the academic and the peer status had reached the level of significance. So, the influence to classroom structures through group activity was not salient. 2. There were inequalities in a natural, undisposed group discussions. It was to say that the high status students' performances were better than the low status students, and then proved the power and prestige order within group was very stable. So, it was accordant with the basic expectations assumptions. Based on the research findings, advanced suggestions about basic expectations assumptions in classroom were proposed. 3. The results of attempt of changing basic expectations assumptions in classroom through experimental teaching and peer discussions were: the inequalities still existed among students' interactions, and hence verified the proposition of the power and prestige order was difficult to change. But after this disposition, the performances of the medium and low status students had improved obviously in a lot of aspects than that in the controlled teaching and peer discussions. So, in the premiss of not harming the high status students' advantage, the experimental teaching and peer discussions were really feasible. Hence, based on the experimental teaching and peer discussions and basic expectations assumptions in classroom , an advanced suggestion was proposed. 4. The extents of improving equality by the task that stressed on single ability (experimental teaching and peer discussions) were limited, so it was important for improving equalities by developing multiple ability tasks and stressing on the multi-values in science classroom. 5. Unless the student's performances had obviously changed in different tasks, the target sociograms couldn't show the differences of the student's performance between these tasks. Because the sociograms couldn't describe the progress or regress of one student's performances in the different tasks. 6.Through the dialogue analysis could get lots of informations degenerated by quantity analysis. Besides, through the process of dialogue analysis could find many problems that quantity analysis couldn't. So, if we could lucubrated this kind of research method and applied it into the peer interactions, such as discourse analysis, it must have many suggestions and implications for researcher and teacher. The results of students' dialogue analysis showed that the status played an important role for students' interaction in groups, it influenced students' participation rates, interests, and etc. Hence, it was very important to the practice of science education. Finally, based on research findings of this study, further avenues of research in the field were discussed and suggested.

Topics: 期望地位理論, 科學小組討論, 互動的平等性, 合作學習, 權力與尊榮的秩序, 基本期望假設, expectation states theory, scientific group discussions, the equality of peer interactions, cooperative learning, power and prestige order, basic expectations assumptions, [[classification]]54
Year: 2010
OAI identifier:
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • (external link)
  • Suggested articles

    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.