I borrowed from Strauss and Corbin’s (1998) constant comparative method to analyze the emerging themes. I identified a particular incident from a literature discussion and compared it to teacher and student interviews as well as my field notes. These comparisons led to categories that were later refined and combined in my findings (Merriam, 1998).
Findings
My study resulted in findings that centered around two main themes: 1) teacher’s role as clarifier, and 2) student vs. teacher-led questioning.
Teacher’s role as clarifier. My coding of Mrs. Adams’ contributions to the group discussions revealed her main role in the group was one of a clarifier. I created and defined the role of clarifier, one similar to what Freedman (1993) calls a guide. According to Freedman (1993), when the teacher plays the guide role, he or she “gives specific information about the…context of the novel” (p. 225). I defined the clarifier role as asking questions or providing information as a way of helping students navigate the text. In the role of participant, Mrs. Adams’ probed and extended her students’ thinking, thus providing opportunities for them to support one another in their learning.
During the first literature discussion group meeting, Mrs. Adams asked the group to think about the bigger picture of men’s role in society after they discussed the plot details of the first chapter for several minutes. Mrs. Adams used a question Emma posed about the text to introduce the idea.
Emma: How can you be married twice?
Mrs. Adams: So we’re having a lot of questions about this idea. How many times can he be married, right? Why does he treat Celie this way? What about his treatment of Nettie? I think what it’s coming around to is this bigger idea about the dad and about men in society. How can we put these clues together to make a conclusion about the men in the society or at least her dad?
Sarah: They probably had more power, more control over women.
Mrs. Adams: Yeah, why do you say that?
Sarah: Because, like, they don’t have the women, the wives don’t have as much
freedom. They had to stay under their control under the house and do what they say.
All of the questions Mrs. Adams posed had already been asked by the students; she provided a summary. Mrs. Adams invited them to think about how those questions could offer clues about the role of men in society. Sarah offered her explanation to Mrs. Adams’ question, and in turn, Mrs. Adams asked another question to probe her thoughts about the issue. Therefore, Sarah was given the opportunity to explain her thoughts to the other students and support their learning. She had to defend her thinking. In this situation, Mrs. Adams’ request to Sarah to explain her conclusions resulted in Sarah touching on one of the major themes of the book—men’s control of women.
In both my initial and follow-up interviews with the group members, all of them said the viewpoints and perspectives of the teacher and their peers helped them understand the book better. Emma said “other people’s outlook on everything” helped her understand the book. Sarah commented about how her peers “might have the same questions as me, and maybe they’ll help me, like understand the book more when they talk about it.” All four group members found Mrs. Adams’ presence in the group helpful. They said she helped them stay on-task and focused. Emma noted, “She did ask us some questions to get us started when we had nothing to say at all. 'Cause there were times like that.” Kevin said, “I believe that she probably needs to be in every group, so everybody will be able to stay on topic.” The students felt that Mrs. Adams’ role as a participant was good for the group.
However, some of Mrs. Adams’ questions were not as successful in generating deep thinking from the group. On the fifth day of discussion, Mrs. Adams and the students discussed the shape of the mud huts in which the Olinka people of Africa lived.
46