This chapter has described how some of the talk that goes on around computers can be under- stood, and has suggested one sort of intervention that has been found to produce a measurable change in the quality of children’s talk. This section offers further examples of talk around the computer for you to consider, with brief notes about their context, and comments for you to compare with your own ideas.
Some children may encourage one another to think of the time they spend at the computer as some sort of play time. They may amuse themselves by typing ‘naughty’ words or by thinking of ways to make the work more like a game. Their talk is as it would be when using a computer at home, and is to do with amusing each other and reconfirming friendship and shared values. Of course this sort of talk is essential in its usual setting, but bringing it into the classroom is an effect that computers can create. Because the computer ‘allows’ it children may, for example, include cartoon-type violence in stories. In the following extract, Adil and Morgan are using a program in which they can select objects and people from a bank of pictures, and write a story for their choice of illustration. Before this conversation occurs, they have already created a girl character who crashes her boat into some rocks and drowns. The
‘dead body’ remains on the screen for some time. Their (boy) character moves into a cave as Adil and Morgan continue writing together.
As you read through the talk, consider these points:
■ Are the boys ‘on task’?
■ Does this talk fall into any of the categories described as cumulative, disputational, or exploratory (remembering of course that there is much talk that cannot be categorised in this way)?
■ Do you think the boys are enjoying writing their story?
■ If you think they are, can you think why?
■ If you think they are not, can you think why?
Transcript 4: Skeleton
Adil: You get to a cave and wander in
Morgan: Yeah (reads) As you are not the cleverest person in the world (laughs)
Adil: (still typing) You get lost. You ask the goblin (points to screen) for help . . . yeah?
Morgan: Yeah. But then his friend jumps on you and kills you . . . and that could be the end of you
Adil: Yeah
Morgan: And then we have to go the other way – yes – no – and you chop his head off or something
Adil: You ask the (typing in) goblin for help . . . and while your back is turned the skeleton jumps on top of you and kills you
Morgan: The skeleton jumps on top of you but you knock him off
Adil: Yes
Morgan: You knock him off
Adil: His body is scattered over a large area
Morgan: But he pulls himself together and goes to sleep on the rock Adil: (typing) He sneaks up behind you
Morgan: And you –
Adil: I think it would have been best if we had seen what the proper one was (reads) the skeleton sneaks up behind you (typing) It leaps on top of you . . . but you manage (types‘to knock it off and’)
Morgan: Has that page got enough? Knocks it off . . . oh Adil: (typing) Bones fly evrywhere (sic)
Morgan: Fly everywhere. Is that how you spell ‘every’?
Adil: All right . . . all right (corrects spelling by inserting a second ‘e’) Morgan: I was just wondering. It looked a bit weird
Adil: Knock it off and bones fly everywhere
Morgan: And then it picks itself up and pulls itself together
Comment
The children are completely engaged in their writing task. Much of the talk is cumulative.
This sort of collaborative talk enables both of them to contribute to a joint outcome; they can rely on their partner to agree with their ideas, with little reflection. They are enjoying making up what is a sort of mild horror story with content that is slightly subversive! This collusion is more likely to occur between friends, and while it is perfectly possible for boys and girls to be friends, most children choose a ‘best friend’ who is the same sex as themselves. Pairs of friends of either sex will tend to engage in cumulative talk. This is pleasant for them and can result in good finished work for some sorts of tasks. But if the task set by the teacher requires problem solving, friends working together might not be the most productive grouping. And if the aim for the talk is that the children elicit reasons and counter-reasons, the same is true.
In the following extract, Hannah and Lisa, both aged nine, are using the art package
‘Paintspa’. They are drawing a house in a field by a river, to go with a story that the class has been putting together.
As you read through the transcript, consider the following questions:
■ What do you think each child is aiming to achieve?
■ Do their aims coincide?
■ Do you feel that these two girls are friends, in the way that Angela and Bridget are in Transcript 2?
■ Are the children ‘on task’?
■ Do you think they will leave the computer feeling content with their work together, and satisfied that it reflects the effort they have put into it?
Transcript 5: Rubbing out
Hannah: I love doing rubbing it out. Do you?
Lisa: Hang on
Lisa: Oh yeah. I don’t need to. I just need to take a square Hannah: a square
Lisa: Why have we come down? (inaudible) Hannah it’s not working. Now. Where are you?
Hannah: Better (inaudible)
Lisa: Hey I’ve found it and you pushed it away. Plonker. Eh, eh, oops. (inaudible) When we . . . that’s better, ain’t it? Let’s go along a bit more yeah? Along a bit more
Hannah: No, no, no that’s it. It’s that Lisa: (inaudible)
Hannah: Across now. Across. Stop. Across. Stop. Down
Lisa: (It says) undo. It doesn’t matter about that bit. So we just need to go down Hannah: Go down. Let me do this bit
Lisa: No, I want to do it
Hannah: Ah, ah. Down. Across. Right now let me do this one
Lisa: Oh what. We want to do the river, don’t we? We want to do the river now Hannah: Not yet. Not yet
Lisa: I want to do the river. I want to do the river first Hannah: You can’t. We ain’t done the boat
Lisa: I’m doing the river
Hannah: Not on there. The river’s going to be that . . . polluted river
Lisa: I know. I’ve got to go all the way back to that thing just there and then we’ve got to go up, haven’t we?
Hannah: Yeah. No we’ve got to go down and across a bit
Lisa: Um
Hannah: Across. Across more
Lisa: Ohh
Hannah: There not much more across. Oh come on Lisa: We’ve got to have one of these each, ain’t we
Hannah: You want to do it now? (singing) Would you like to swing on a star bum bum bum carry moon beams swing on a star um um um. Would you like to swing on a star ow ow ow
Lisa: I like these (colours)
Comment
Hannah and Lisa have been asked to work together on a picture. But they cannot agree on anything that appears (or disappears) because they have not shared their conception of the finished product with one another, and are not doing so as they go along. It is interesting how disputational talk like this can be part of a creative process, in that a finished product results;
but the creation entails what appears to be a high level of frustration. It appears that neither of the children will feel ownership or pride in the finished result, since it is not what either of them wants separately, and they are not collaborating in a way that would make it a satisfying joint enterprise. They do not negotiate ideas or ask one another for reasons. The role of the computer in this scenario is overtly to provide the means of constructing a picture, and covertly to be a third party, reflecting the wishes of whoever had hold of the mouse last.
The children will no doubt have work to show but they will not have extended their talk repertoire or practised special and useful talk skills. This is fine, as long as the teacher is aware that it is the case. If the children are fiddling around at break time, trying to see how the program works, this sort of disputational talk might be acceptable. But in the context of a school day, in which a ‘turn’ on the computer is still something of a privilege, it is perhaps a waste of the children’s time. And they certainly display signs of being slightly disengaged by the end of this session. But they have not given up. This persistent effort in the face of continual failure to master the program, and constant unhelpfulness from their partner, is a tribute to the motivating power of the computer, and of course to the determination of the
individuals. If their individual commitment had been directed into a group effort, and their talk disciplined towards negotiation, they might have succeeded better.
Activity
Record a group of children working together at the computer. Listen to the tape. Can you pick out examples of the three types of talk mentioned in this chapter? How much exploratory talk happens? Which of the children is most adept at facilitating this sort of talk? How can the incidence of exploratory talk be increased?
Most children do their best to collaborate with their partner most of the time, but they may not know how to negotiate with another child whose agenda for the shared activity is very different from their own. The social positions held by boys and girls are naturally extremely important to them, and their interactions inevitably contain an element of awareness of this. Effective talk can help individual children to truly collaborate, that is to express their own ideas lucidly and at the same time find out what their workmates are really thinking about the task in hand. The advantage of teaching about talk, that is teaching children how to question one another, negotiate ideas, share information, and attempt to reach a reasoned agreement, is that the ground rules underlying the ensuing discussion help to avoid the effects of gender conditioning, friendship groups, and other social brick walls that prevent children learning. It’s important to be aware of the different ways that children may approach group work at the computer, and the problems that may arise because of the behaviour they bring to the task. Encouraging children to become aware of their own perceptions of one another may help as a strategy for discouraging prejudice which possibly has its origins in simple thoughtlessness.