%0 Journal Article %1 598 %A Teasley, S. D. %C Univ Michigan,Dept Psychol,Ann Arbor,Mi 48109 %D 1995 %J Developmental Psychology %K achievement, discourse, file-import-09-02-13, knowledge, language-acquisition, peer-influences %N (c) 2002 Inst. For Sci. Info %P 207-220+ %T The role of talk in childrens peer collaborations %U http://linkseeker.lanl.gov/stanford?genre=article&\#38;issn=0012-1649&\#38;date=1995&\#38;volume=31&\#38;issue=2&\#38;spage=207&\#38;atitle=THE\%20ROLE\%20OF\%20TALK\%20IN\%20CHILDRENS\%20PEER\%20COLLABORATIONS&\#38;aulast=TEASLEY&\#38;auinit=SD %V 31 %X The role of talk in children's peer collaborations using a computer-based scientific reasoning task was investigated in this study. Seventy 4th-grade students were assigned to work alone or with a same-sex partner for 1 20-min session. Half of the children in each condition (alone and dyads) were asked to talk as they worked, and half were not. Significant performance differences between groups were present, although there were no significant differences in experimental activity. Talk dyads generated better hypotheses than no-talk alones and no-talk dyads, and talk alones did not generate better hypotheses than no-talk alones. Analyses of children's talk showed that talk dyads produced more talk overall and more interpretive types of talk than talk alones. The importance of peer collaborations as a social context that supports interpretive cognitive processes was discussed.

@article{598, abstract = {The role of talk in children's peer collaborations using a computer-based scientific reasoning task was investigated in this study. Seventy 4th-grade students were assigned to work alone or with a same-sex partner for 1 20-min session. Half of the children in each condition (alone and dyads) were asked to talk as they worked, and half were not. Significant performance differences between groups were present, although there were no significant differences in experimental activity. Talk dyads generated better hypotheses than no-talk alones and no-talk dyads, and talk alones did not generate better hypotheses than no-talk alones. Analyses of children's talk showed that talk dyads produced more talk overall and more interpretive types of talk than talk alones. The importance of peer collaborations as a social context that supports interpretive cognitive processes was discussed.}, added-at = {2009-02-24T19:22:48.000+0100}, address = {Univ Michigan,Dept Psychol,Ann Arbor,Mi 48109}, author = {Teasley, S. D.}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2725a11dd640844a3aa323f35c41dd825/clachapelle}, citeulike-article-id = {4046602}, comment = {--trying to tease out positive benefits of self-talk versus positive benefits of collaboration. -reviews private-speech studies, noting that more private speech seems to lead to more learning, but it is unclear how from this research. think-aloud studies, on the other hand, sometimes do look at content of talk, and conclude that the articulation of ideas not directly presented (interpretive statements) have the best effect on performance, presumably because it is talk linking the current problem to prior understandings. "it seems likely that collaborations succeed because the talk between partners includes the specific types of verbalization that have also been shown by think-aloud studies to improve performance. What is unanswered at this point is how the collaborative condition affects the production of specific types of verbalization." -"factors such as type of task, task difficulty, and experimental instructions all affect the production of talk." studies that looked at collaborating \& verbalization "did not characterize the talk produced in the verbalizing conditions, it is not known whether dyads and alones produced the same kind of talk, or why talk might have had an effect in either condition." -teasley found that "The proportion of interpretive talk [of kids in study] was positively related to final hypothesis scores... a social context for talk seems to have hastened the formulation of generally correct hypotheses and to have contributed to the development of more elaborated hypotheses. ...these data suggest that collaborations lead to learning not because of the collaborations per se, but rather because the collaboration increased the likelihood that children would engage in the kinds of talk that support learning." -- "The answer to the question, "Why are two heads better than one?" may fundamentally rest on the interdependency of cognition and social relations in communication. Built into communication is an implicit obligation to make sense to one's conversational partner ( Grice, 1989 ). ...When children are talking to partners as they work on problem-solving tasks, the situation requires coordinating conversational coherence to maintain the ongoing task activity." -- "Some of the children in the talk alone condition may have been more aware that their talk would ultimately be heard by the experimenter, and therefore maintained the social obligation to be coherent and explicit. ... If this assumption is correct, then any procedure that reproduces the social obligation for coherence that is implicit in language should result in interpretive thinking without actual vocalization or the presence of a partner." --" Most of the previous explanations for the superior performance of dyads have focused on the importance of input from the partner. ... According to these models, learning is facilitated by exposure to a greater number and diversity of explanations and possible solutions ( Azmitia, 1988 ; Zimmerman \& Blom, 1983 ) or by the socio-cognitive conflict produced by exposure to other's ideas (e.g., Ames \& Murray, 1982 ; Glachan \& Light, 1982 ). Explanations that have specifically looked at communication, such as coconstruction ( Damon \& Phelps, 1989 ) and intersubjectivity ( Forman, 1992 ; Tudge, 1992 ), have stressed the importance of input from both partners. In these models, the benefits of a partner are not just hearing the ideas of another person, but actively participating in sharing ideas with them. " --"These results point to the importance of peer collaboration as a social context that supports interpretive cognitive processes through the interdependence of cognition and social relations fundamental to communication. " [CPL] ---=note-separator=--- (private-note)html on server}, interhash = {7349c886107a3113a9b49a442b0a857a}, intrahash = {725a11dd640844a3aa323f35c41dd825}, journal = {Developmental Psychology}, keywords = {achievement, discourse, file-import-09-02-13, knowledge, language-acquisition, peer-influences}, number = {(c) 2002 Inst. For Sci. Info}, pages = {207-220+}, posted-at = {2009-02-13 21:46:31}, priority = {0}, timestamp = {2009-02-24T19:22:56.000+0100}, title = {The role of talk in childrens peer collaborations}, url = {http://linkseeker.lanl.gov/stanford?genre=article\&\#38;issn=0012-1649\&\#38;date=1995\&\#38;volume=31\&\#38;issue=2\&\#38;spage=207\&\#38;atitle=THE\%20ROLE\%20OF\%20TALK\%20IN\%20CHILDRENS\%20PEER\%20COLLABORATIONS\&\#38;aulast=TEASLEY\&\#38;auinit=SD}, volume = 31, year = 1995 }