A Case Study Of Teachers’ Use Of Rational Language In Small Class Rule Education

Reasoning language refers to the language in which there is a causal relationship between the preceding and the following sentences in everyday conversation.Teachers use reasoning language for rule education,which not only standardizes children’s behavior,but also provides them with reasons for explaining problems and standardizing behaviors,which can not only help children better understand the content of rules,but also help them better internalize rules and abide by them.Based on the systemic functional linguistics perspective,we select 10 teachers from 3-4 years old class of the C preschool as the research object,adopts qualitative research method of the rule education in teachers’ reasoning language to carry on the field observation and interview.On the basis of the rule items summarized in the early stage,the reasoning language used by preschool teachers in the implementation of rule education was collected,combined with the background at that time and children’s feedback behavior to form a case,and the theoretical framework of reasoning language was sorted out and analyzed.The study found that: In the rule education of the 3-4 years old class,the frequency of reasoning language used by teachers is not high.And its use focuses on the rule education based on life activities;teachers use the reasoning methods based on the social position far more frequently than the logical position.Among the methods of reasoning based on the social grounding,the coercive position is the most frequently used by teachers;the frequency of teacher’s reasoning with single position is the highest,but in terms of effectiveness,the way of reasoning with multiple positions is much higher than the way of reasoning with single position.According to the above research findings,the researchers gave the following suggestions: In rule education,teachers should increase the frequency of using cooperative,logical and other positive reasoning methods;teachers should avoid using negative reasoning methods such as threat and bribery;teachers should use more reasoning language combining multiple groundings.