Teacher–Child Interaction in a Goal-Oriented Preschool Context: A Micro-Analytical Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The present study show from two episodes the interaction process in a goal-oriented preschool activity between a teacher and four students. The analysis is oriented by the frame of the deference-emotion system and shows how verbal and no verbal interaction occurs. The study will help provide insights for preschool teachers to do high-quality interactions. However, there are some aspects of being more precise and more profound to improve the paper.

 

My concerns begin with the method. For example, if well the study departs from previous studies, it is necessary to describe with some detail the kind of the observed activities and their selection. Also, which were the criteria to select the moments to analyze. Answer ¿how were significant patterns of interaction selected? ¿which criteria were used to identify significance? Only with these questions solved will it be clear why the episodes were selected.

 

Another doubt surge is why only two moments, and on the same observation. Are there no other moments relevant to describe? What happens with others' observations, not having significant moments? Are other moments in other classes different or similar to the extract analyzed?

 

The analyses section is obscure. For example, it is not transparent. How is the process of oscillation between the description of social behavior and reflections on their relational implications? Which kind of reflections do researchers do in the analysis processes? Which is the criteria o categorization to articulate the observations and reflections?  How can other researchers do a similar analysis? The answers to questions like these are relevant to appreciate the proposal in this study.

 

In the results, the main doubt is, as mentioned previously, why the selected excerpt is representative? Is it a paradigmatic example? How to justify an alone situation?

 

 

In the analysis is interesting to observe how children have difficulties understanding subtle teacher' messages. Another interesting date is how the teacher is not conscious of the role to norm the children's behavior about what should draw in the goal-oriented framework. However, there is not any explanation for that reflection. So it is necessary to advance some justification to be sure that is the better interpretation of data.

 

In general, it is not easy to find, in the form that the analysis is presented, which is the more relevant finding of the study that there are not previously noted by other studies refereed in the literature.

 

Finally, concerning education, How should teachers understand the analysis? Does the episode reflect what should or should not be in the processes of interaction in class? Which is to education the relevance of the study? Some reflections about such questions will be helpful and necessary.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The problem of learning effectiveness is relevant for the education systems of various countries. In the presented article, the author describes a transitional stage in Scandinavian preschool pedagogy, focused on ensuring that kindergarten performs not only the function of supervision and care, but also the preparation of children for school. 

One of the most important aspects here is the child's understanding of the educational tasks presented by the teacher, the willingness and ability to perform them, relying on formal and informal reinforcements and sanctions from the teacher, the teacher.

Related to this are the key questions posed by the author: How is social adaptation carried out in verbal and non-verbal interactions in the relationship of a preschool teacher and a child during purposeful activity? How can social adaptation be understood in the context of preschool education in terms of the "respect-emotions" system?

The article provides an overview of the relevant literature, which indicates that it is not easy for a preschool teacher to provide the necessary level of skills and achievements for preschoolers, only relying on positive emotional reinforcements. As a result, the author makes the quite expected conclusion that the options for teacher-child interactions related to tactics and strategy of preparing for school have not been studied enough yet. This is especially true for both verbal and nonverbal aspects of this interaction.  

In paragraph 5 in detail (by the minute), an episode is presented that reveals the relationship between the teacher and the boy Elof (age approximately 4 years) about his drawing, which does not meet the task set by the teacher (to draw a tree). The author describes in sufficient detail the verbal (words, intonations) and non-verbal (facial expressions, gestures) emotional reactions of the teacher (designated as "subtle sanctions on the part of the teacher") and the child in the process of their interaction about the unfulfilled task. These aspects are related to the social adaptation of the child – a complex process, but necessary. However, for its effectiveness, it is important that participants use an equally understood sign system. Here, as the author emphasizes, the boy, feeling a certain rejection on the part of the teacher, cannot understand why his drawing was not approved. Some evaluation or analytical generalization was lacking in this part. 

In the final part, the author gives three options for establishing the "order of interaction" between the teacher and the child: reliance on obedience, orientation to self-control (directly related to the child's age readiness), assistance and correction to children by the teacher in the process of completing the task. It is worth noting that the author's repeated appeals to the verbal / nonverbal sides of communication lead to the idea that at the beginning of the activity it is worth paying more attention to the verbal side, and in the process – nonverbal forms as a means of correction, support. This corresponds to both the age characteristics of preschool children and the general cognitive strategy.

The presented material is certainly interesting, it indicates a good research attitude of the author. However, as wishes, I would like to draw attention to the following aspects: the questions presented at the beginning of the article did not receive specific answers; the presentation of "other people's" research took up most of the volume of the article; the analytical part of the material was reduced (compared with the descriptive one). 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript improved the first version and solved the significant observations of reviewers.

However, the rationale of the analysis is still weak. For example, it is not clear the pattern selection. How many patterns and which characteristics have? What are the reasons to select the pattern described in the texts as paradigmatic? The author said that their no applied criteria, but is that possible? When an example is chosen as paradigmatic, some criteria are applied, and the manuscript's new text-only describes but does not explain.

If this concern is explained more satisfactorily, I have no objection to the manuscript being published.

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx