Abstract
This article reports on an attempt to describe the verbal interaction in a sample of 29 university tutorial groups. Methodological problems inherent in a study focussing on an educational process with a restricted sample size are discussed. The description then reports on the total verbal activity, compares the tutorial discussion with that coded in two classroom studies, and contrasts tutor and student behaviours. Tutor behaviour is then examined in more depth and, by clustering like tutor behaviours, six tutor roles are identified and described. These roles are labelled reflexive judge, data input, stage setter, elaborator, probe, and cognitive engineer. A brief exploration is made of relationships between these tutor roles and two kinds of criteria. One is the rating by students of the worth of the tutorials over the semester; the other is the use by students of different cognitive levels during the discussion. An indication is given of how the role descriptions have been utilized in short courses on small group teaching for tertiary teachers.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Australian Vice Chancellors' Committee. (1963). Teaching Methods in Australian Universities (Chairman: Passmore, J.A.).
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction Process Analysis: A Method for the Study of Small Groups. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
Beard, R. M. (1967). Research into Teaching Methods in Higher Education (mainly in British Universities). London: Society for Research into Higher Education.
Beard, R. M. (1970). Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Bellack, A. A., Kliebard, H. M., Hyman, R. T., Smith, F. L. (1966). The Language of the Classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
Benne, K. D. and Sheats, P. (1948). “Functional roles of group members.” Journal of Social Issues, 4 (No. 2): 42–47.
Bloom, B. S., ed., (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. London: Longmans Green.
Campbell, D. T. and Stanley, J. C. (1963). “Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research on Teaching,” in N. L. Gage, ed., Handbook of Research on Teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Dubin, R. and Taveggia, T. C. (1968). The Teaching-Learning Paradox. Oregon: Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration, University of Oregon.
Dunkin, M. J. and Biddle, B. J. (1974). The Study of Teaching. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Gallagher, J. J. and Aschner, M. J. (1963). “A preliminary report on analyses of classroom interaction.” Merrill-Palmer Quarterly of Behavior and Development, 9, 183–195.
Henry, N., ed. (1960). The Dynamics of Instructional Groups. 59th Yearbook, Part II, N.S.S.E., University of Chicago Press.
Kounin, J. S., Gump, P. V., and Ryan, J. J. III (1970). “Explorations in Classroom Management,” in M. B. Miles and W. W. Charters Jr., Learning in Social Settings. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
McGrath, J. E. and Altman, I. (1966). Small Group Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
McLeish, J. (1966). “Lecture, tutorial, seminar: the students' view.” Paper presented to Annual Meeting of Society for Research into Higher Education.
McQuitty, L. L. (1964). “Capabilities and improvements of linkage analysis as a clustering method.” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24: 441–456.
McQuitty, L. L. (1966). “Single and multiple hierarchical classification by reciprocal pairs and rank order types,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 26, 253–265.
Marris, P. (1964). The Experience of Higher Education. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Meux, M. O. (1967). “Studies of learning in the school setting.” Review of Educational Research, 37, 539–562.
Miles, M. B. (1964). Innovation in Education. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Mitchell, A. G. (1964). “The Tutorial and its Relationship to the Lecture,” in Notes on University Education, Bulletin No. 6, University of Sydney; Office of Advisory Services.
Power, C. N. (1971). The Effects of Communication Patterns on Student Sociometric Status, Attitudes, and Achievement in Science. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation: University of Queensland.
Schonell, F. J., Roe, E., and Meddleton, I. G. (1962). Promise and Performance. London: University of London Press.
Siegel, L. (1967). “An Overview of Contemporary Formulations,” in L. Siegel, ed., Instruction: Some Contemporary Viewpoints. San Francisco: Chandler.
Taba, H. and Elzey, F. F. (1964). Thinking in Elementary School Children. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Cooperative Research Project No. 1574. San Francisco: San Francisco State College.
Veldman, D. J. (1967). Fortran Programming for the Behavioural Sciences. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Ward, J. H. Jr. (1963). “Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function.” American Statistical Association Journal, 58, 236–244.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Baumgart, N. Verbal interaction in university tutorials. High Educ 5, 301–317 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00136451
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00136451