be wary of providing too much scaffolding and thus limiting the opportunities students have to discuss issues that interest them. Knowing when to step in and when to step out is difficult, but teachers who are mindful of their role in the group provide their students the environment needed to create meaningful conversation. Finally, literature discussions are most successful when students lead (Peterson & Eeds, 2007; Daniels, 1994). Social interaction helps students conceptualize ideas because they have to defend their thinking (Dewey, 1938). Student-initiated discussions sparked by questions about a text result in authentic, meaningful conversations. So, giving students an environment in which to practice and share these strategies benefits all group members. Ultimately, balancing teacher roles in a literature discussion group is not easy but is well worth the time and effort to help struggling readers, and all students, better comprehend and think about books.
References
Barnes, D. (1992). From communication to
curriculum. (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH:
Barnes, D., & Todd, F. (1995). Communication
and learning revisited: Making meaning through talk. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Daniels, H. (2002). Literature circles: Voice and
choice in book clubs and reading groups. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Daniels, H. (1994). Literature circles: Voice and
choice in the student-centered classroom. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education (2007). Analysis of student
population: Racial breakdown. 20 Oct. 2008.
Retrieved from http://www.dese.mo.gov/planning/profile/building/bl010093.html.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education.
New York: The MacMillan Company.
Freedman, L. (1993). Teacher talk: The role of
the teacher in literature discussion groups. In K. M. Pierce and C. J. Gilles (Eds.), Cycles of meaning: Exploring the potential of talk in learning communities. (pp. 219-235). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gallimore, R., & Tharp, R. (1990). Teaching mind
in society: Teaching, schooling, and literate discourse. In L. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education. (pp. 175-205). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Gilles, C. (1993). We make an idea: Cycles of
meaning in literature discussion groups. In K. M. Pierce and C. J. Gilles (Eds.), Cycles of meaning: Exploring the potential of talk in learning communities. (pp. 199-217). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Hynds, S. (1992). Challenging questions in the
teaching of literature. In J. A. Langer (Ed.), Literature instruction: Focus on student response. (pp. 54-77). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
Langer, J. A. (1992). Rethinking literature
instruction. In J. A. Langer (Ed.), Literature
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and
case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
O’Flahavan, J. F. (1994). Teacher role options in
discussions about literature. The Reading Teacher, 48(4), 354-356.
Peterson, R., & Eeds, M. (2007). Grand
conversations: Literature groups in action.
Pierce, K. M. & Gilles, C. (2008). From explora-
tory talk to critical conversations. In N. Mercer and S. Hodgkinson (Eds.), Exploring talk in schools. (pp. 37-54). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Short, K. G. (1990). Creating a community of
learners. In K. G. Short and K. M. Pierce (Eds.), Talking about books: Creating literate communities. (pp. 33-52). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of quali-
tative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The
development of higher psychological process-es. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walker, A. (1990). The color purple. New York:
Pocket.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a
sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
49