Abstract
This paper investigates the tension between collaboration and conflict in conversation-analytic data sessions. In conversation analysis, data sessions are an important part of research practice and they also play a central role in the academic method education.
Our data consist of focus group interviews among conversation-analytic experts and novices. The interviews are analysed using a combination of discursive focus group research methodology and conversation analysis. We ask (1) how data session interaction is presented in the participants’ talk and (2) how the participants talk about collaboration and conflict in the focus group interviews.
The analysis reveals observable differences in how the experts and novices talked about the data sessions. While the experts emphasized the process of collective meaning making, the novices stressed the recognition of individual contributions. Experts also considered silence as a discreet way of disregarding questionable contributions, whereas novices described silence as the worst possible reaction to a contribution.
Our results reflect the dissonance between collective responsibilities and individual needs, typical in collaborative learning. Our research suggests that, in academic method education, the balancing between these needs may be especially challenging in groups of members with different levels of competence.
Our data consist of focus group interviews among conversation-analytic experts and novices. The interviews are analysed using a combination of discursive focus group research methodology and conversation analysis. We ask (1) how data session interaction is presented in the participants’ talk and (2) how the participants talk about collaboration and conflict in the focus group interviews.
The analysis reveals observable differences in how the experts and novices talked about the data sessions. While the experts emphasized the process of collective meaning making, the novices stressed the recognition of individual contributions. Experts also considered silence as a discreet way of disregarding questionable contributions, whereas novices described silence as the worst possible reaction to a contribution.
Our results reflect the dissonance between collective responsibilities and individual needs, typical in collaborative learning. Our research suggests that, in academic method education, the balancing between these needs may be especially challenging in groups of members with different levels of competence.
| Original language | Finnish |
|---|---|
| Journal | Yliopistopedagogiikka |
| Volume | 2018 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - 19 Oct 2018 |
| Externally published | Yes |
| Publication type | A1 Journal article-refereed |