There were times, however, when Mrs. Adams took control of the questioning, often resulting in a lot of talk from Mrs. Adams and not much response from her students. In the first meeting, Sarah commented that the character Mister is respected by others because of his name. Mrs. Adams acknowledged Sarah’s comment but moved the conversation in a different direction.
Mrs. Adams: Good. Let’s come back to that question in just a little, a minute, or
that idea. So he gets respected. He wants Nettie. Why does he want Nettie? Kevin?
Emma: She’s new.
Mrs. Adams: Why does he want Nettie? Mister. Why does Mister want Nettie? What did he tell Pa? What’s the reason he wants Nettie?
Kevin: He wanted a woman to watch over his children. 'Cause he didn’t have to. 'Cause he couldn’t hardly watch over his children plus do the farm work at the same time.
Mrs. Adams: What did…go ahead.
Emma: She’s new, like she hasn’t had babies yet.
Mrs. Adams: She hasn’t had babies. She’s a virgin, right? And she’s pretty. There’s
clues in here that she’s pretty. What happened to Mister’s wife?
Emma: She died.
During this discussion, Mrs. Adams asked a question on all but one turn. She moved the conversation away from Sarah’s observation and asked Kevin to respond to her question. When Emma offered an answer, she asked the question again, waiting for Kevin to respond. After Kevin answered, Mrs. Adams attempted to ask another question but was cut off by Emma, who submitted her original answer again. Mrs. Adams continued to ask questions possibly to clarify textual details, so the students were not given the opportunity to ask their own questions. Rather, they answered Mrs. Adams’ questions to the group.
Discussion
Summary and implications. Although this study focused on only one literature group discussion, it adds to our understanding of how a teacher and her students negotiate their roles in this learning environment. The literature discussion format provided an opportunity for struggling readers to ask ques-tions and talk about parts of a book that intrigued them. Furthermore, the social envi-ronment encouraged them to be accountable, coming prepared and contributing to the conversation. When all group members participated, they learned from one another and were able to add to their understanding of the text. The teacher and all four students disclosed in their interviews that discussing a book with other people helped them compre-hend it better because other people presented questions and viewpoints they may not have considered.
In this study, the teacher had a difficult time defining her role. On one hand, she wanted her students to talk about what interested them, to ask questions, and to figure out how to make the discussion work on their own. On the other hand, she wanted to share her love of books, to ensure that her students discussed important points, and to ask her own questions. The act of balancing teacher roles in a literature discussion group is a difficult one.
Three implications for practice emerged from this study. First, teachers can be valuable members of the discussion group as partici-pants. Molly’s role as clarifier helped her students construct more meaning from The Color Purple than if they had read the novel without the benefit of her probing questions. Some assume by the time students enter secondary school, they are capable of navigating small group discussions on their own. However, this study suggests that if readers are left alone, especially if they struggle with comprehending text, learning may not be as productive as it would be with some teacher guidance. Second, even though teachers can be an asset to literature discussions, they must be aware of stepping in too frequently and not letting the students control the conversation. The best way for students to learn from one another is to give them the opportunity to talk without the teacher setting the agenda (Barnes, 1992; Freedman, 1993; Wells, 1999). Teachers must
48