Discussion as performance, or not: the Tigers talk about

Following from the modelled reading club discussion with the Cool Cats, the Tigers recorded their first discussion on the novel, Don’t tell me what to do in the library. I

set up the recorder for them, asked their names, and left them to record their responses while I listened to other groups. The Tigers were concerned about maintaining their discussion for the recording so there is echoing of what is said which supports the group’s progress. Uncertainty, new roles, and recordings may have contributed to some nerves which manifested in regular giggling as group members took up new roles in the discussion. There are also giggles when speakers elaborate on a position. Below is an excerpt from their first discussion when the group was invited to discuss the main character of their book.

Gerri: Hello.

Giggles

Whispers: Tom.

Gerri: (Whispers) The main character is Tom. Leo: Tom.

Zimi: (Whispers) The main character is Tom.

Lilla: (Loudlyi) Ja the main character is Tom. Leo what did you think about

Tom?

Leo: Well, he,

Eran: Tom went on an adventure and ran away from home Leo: Home.

Eran: And he’s a bit ambitious, and,

Giggles

Eran: Because of his adventure he landed up in trouble and, got scared Leo: Ja

Giggles

Lilla: So what do you think, um, the trouble with Tom was? Why did he, land up in trouble? Zola?

In this extract, one group member, Lilla, exercises her agency to draw on school- related Discourses. In doing so she assumes a ‘teacherly’ role in the discussion by asking questions to which she already knows the answers of other participants. In the absence of the teacher/expert figure she assumes this role in taking her group through the issues to be discussed. Her ‘teacherly’ authority extends to calling on group members – generally the quieter ones – to answer. For the most part, her group supports her ‘teacherly’ stance by answering her questions and prompting her with a script. This concern with group cohesion is part of the ‘ground-rules’  of cumulative talk according to Wegerif and Mercer (1997: 55), who note that this cooperative talk “can lead to knowledge construction through the sharing of

perspectives”. Lesley (2009) suggests how performance of reading is integral to

young adults’ understandings of what constitutes ‘good reading’ and here we see a performance of a ‘good’ reading club interaction using cumulative talk and involving all group members.

In the next section Lilla continues to work towards school Discourse but she and Gerri are aware that she is acting in a teacher’s role which amuses them both.

Leo: Rola?

Zola:  Don’t call me that name

Giggles

Gerri: Speak man, Zola! Leo: Speak!

(Whispering) Ok, Ok.

Lilla: Ok, I think the reason Tom fell in so much trouble was that he trusted people too much.

Leo: Ja too much. (Giggles)

Lilla: He landed up in a lot of trouble, with, believing that he has to go scuba diving for diamonds, diamonds, (giggles) instead it was, (whispers) what was

it?

Eran: Heroin. (Giggles)

Lilla: Heroin.

Zola: Why did Masters make him?

Lilla: Because he wanted to become a, a jockey. Leo: A jockey hey.

Eran: He was ambitious, for money. Leo: For money.

Gerri: (Whispers) And his father wanted him to work in an office. Leo: (Loudly) His father wanted him to work in an office.

Lilla: And he told people, umm…

Eran & Gerri: Masters and Shirley.

Lilla: He told, Masters and Shirley, the people that met him on the way, when he was on his way to England, to London, that his parents are dead and he had no parents, but his parents were alive and he just got into much more trouble than he was.

(Whispering)

Zola: Eeeh

Lilla: Tell me what do you think …  umm, Tom did too easily? Why did he trust, umm why did he trust, Shirley too much?

Zola: Because she was so nice to him. (Giggles)

Eran: (Whispers) She fell in love.

(Giggles)

Gerri: She fell in love with him. (Giggles)

Lilla: Eran? (Giggles)

Gerri : (Whispers) Tom fell in love with Shirley

Lilla: Ja, Tom fell in love with Shirley and he trusted Masters too easily and the way Masters spoke to him. He wanted more money for the job because he said the job was dangerous but in the end he never received his money because, Masters died.

Eran: Ok. So how do you think nêê, the main character grew?

Lilla: He grew, emotionally, physically and mentally because it strengthened him a whole lot and what he was, made him stronger than what he was before the previous time that didn’t  crook.

Eran: Ok. And you Gerri? (Giggles)

Eran: Ok, blank Lilla: Blank!

(Giggles) (Whispers) Stop, stop it! (Referring to the tape recorder)

Generally this first recording of a reading club interaction follows a question and answer format with various contributions building on each other cumulatively. The careful listening and echoing reflects a dialogic process of shared utterances. As an electric spark only occurs when two different terminals are hooked together (Bakhtin in Wegerif & Mercer, 1997), so through these utterances, learners connect to make meaning. Mercer suggests that through children’s talk we have access to their meaning making processes. Dialogism is a useful theory in examining learners’

the “central insight that understanding always requires more than one voice or perspective”. So, in addition to the agency to take up school related Discourse, the reading club, as a structure provides space for learners to exercise their agency to jointly construct meaning. We see learners in this reading club discussion collaborate in a meaning-making construction of their novel. Lilla’s‘teacherly’ role is just that: an act that she maintains through the support of her group. Together they build a shared presentation of their understanding of the book.

While recognising the collaborative nature of the Tiger’s discussion here, it is also important to recognise the cultural resources drawn on in this interaction. The main voice heard in the discussion is Lilla’s. She seems to have taken up the available school Discourse of the ‘good’ teacher figure who leads others and directs their understanding of what is important to know in this particular novel. She seems to feel responsible for keeping the conversation going and the others whisper prompts to her and provide her with an appropriate script at times so that their performance as a group is sustained. She alternates between asking questions, usually based on the content, to which she already knows the answers, which she addresses to her group members, and answering her own or other’s questions. The ‘good’ teacher involves many learners via questions. She also provides her own answers should that be necessary and demonstrates her understanding of the plot. Towards the end Eran challenges her ‘teacherly’ position by asking “How do you think the main character

grew?” to which Lilla, in the role of the ‘good’ teacher, replies very confidently and

broadly. No-one questions her statement or asks for verification or some evidence as

to Tom’s emotional or physical growth; probably the good teacher does not face

challenges or queries either so her group is complicit in her performance. It would seem that asking the teachers to verify statements is not part of their available practice, or her peers chose to support her teacherly stance by not challenging her and thus maintain group cohesion. Both her role as the teacher, and Eran’s as the confident pupil, provoke much laughter among the group indicating an awareness of the roles they are playing for this recording. Together, in this dialogic interaction, as a reading club they were afforded space and agency to comment on this story and through a cumulative process presented a group understanding which they might not have achieved on an individual level. While this group reaches some shared understanding of the book, they do so by replicating existing school practices.

The next vignettes occurred after the mid-term examinations and recess, with the addition of new titles and after some practice of reading clubs. This vignette focuses on the Contagious Kids.