教师话语作为课堂的主要组织者，在教学和学习过程中起着举足轻重的作用, 研究发现课堂话语影响着学生的课堂参与。对教师话语进行调查和分析，有助于教师更好地认识到其对学生语言学习的重要性, 提高教师在教学中对课堂话语的敏感度，反思权力对学生课堂参与的影响, 促进教育公平。本研究采用观察法和批判性话语分析法, 选取北京知名中学英语教师教授的两个班级, 共计学生80名, 进行为期2个月的在线课堂观察。研究运用批判语言学中的话语分析方法以及费尔克劳的话语生产与解读分析框架，探究课堂话语的特征, 并设计英语阅读课堂学生话语评价表。本研究通过课堂观察法对学生进行分类, 结合积极参与课堂话语讨论的状态, 被动参与课堂话语讨论状态，拒绝参与课堂讨论状态, 依次分为三个等级，从每个参与状态范围随机抽选5名学生, 共计15人，后针对这15名学生进行深度课堂观察及访谈调查，并通过对学生在英语阅读课堂话语中的语言生产水平、语言传播水平以及语言解释水平进行具体分析。随后结合学生对课堂参与评价的现状, 分析权力关系对学生课堂参与的影响。以文本为中心的话语批判技术, 为课堂教学中教师改变自身话语规则体系以保持自身话语的可协商性提供了实现路径，同时也从宏观与微观视角对课堂话语进行基于证据的剖析。经研究发现：

学生没有平等的机会来回答问题，回答问题的类型存在差异，学业边缘化的现象很突出。教师在选择互动对象时存在偏见, 对学业优等生和后进生更加关注，但与中层的学生缺乏交流。学业程度好的学生获得具有挑战性的问题, 上课走神的学生因教师的特别关注，获得更多参与机机会；教师对优秀学生话语的过早言语赞扬削弱了其他学生回答问题的动机。

部分男孩通过有意炫耀的方式吸引教师注意力，而女孩则会在评论区主动留下评论参与课堂讨论, 尝试打破线上与线下学习的边界，但教师特别关注扰乱课堂纪律或注意力不集中的男孩，并以提供宝贵问题回答机会的方式来弥补落后的学业, 而女孩只会得到口头鼓励。然而出于警告目的而留下的过长的现场思考时间也挤占了其他学生参与的机会。

3. 学生的问题回答得到教师在内容和时机方面的严格限制，有规范标准的期待答案，受教师操控的话轮分配时机在规范对话，在提升课堂效率的同时也剥夺了学生知识建构的过程。学生在参与课堂话语讨论的过程中，获得更多机会与权力有助于提升学生的语言生产、语言的传递以及语言的解释水平。

基于此, 文本提出关注边缘同学的课堂参与情况，警惕性别差异对话导致的负面影响，承认学生的课堂贡献以及避免过度操控的建议。

As the major organizer of the classroom, teacher discourse plays a crucial role in the teaching and learning process. Research has found that classroom discourse affects students' classroom participation. Conducting a survey and analysis of teacher discourse can help teachers better understand the importance of it in students' language learning, improve their sensitivity to classroom discourse in teaching, reflect on the impact of power on students' classroom participation, and promote educational equity. This study implemented observation and critical discourse analysis methods to select two classes taught by renowned English teachers in Beijing, with a total of 80 students, for a 2-month online classroom observation. The study utilizes discourse analysis methods from critical linguistics and Fairclough’s discourse production and interpretation analysis framework to explore the characteristics of classroom discourse and design a student discourse evaluation table for English reading classrooms. Classroom observation method is used to classify students, combining their active participation in classroom discourse discussions, passive participation in classroom discourse discussions, and refusal to participate in classroom discussions. They are divided into three levels, with 5 students randomly selected from each level of participation, totaling 15 students. After that, in-depth classroom observation and interview surveys were conducted on these students, and a specific analysis of students’ language production level, language communication level, and language interpretation level in English reading classroom discourse was conducted. Subsequently, based on the current situation of student’ evaluation of classroom participation, the analysis of the impact of power relations on students’ classroom participation was employed. Finally, a text-centered discourse critique technique was obtained, providing a path for teachers to change their own discourse rules system in classroom teaching to maintain the negotiability of their own discourse. At the same time, evidence-based analysis of classroom discourse was also conducted from both macro and micro perspectives. It was found that：

1). Students do not have equal opportunities to answer questions, and there are differences in the types of questions answered, and marginalization is prominent. Teachers were biased in their selection of targets for interactions, paying more attention to academically advanced students, but lacking interaction with average students. Students who were academically advanced received challenging questions, and students who were distracted in class received more opportunities to participate due to special attention from the teacher. The teachers’ active verbal praise of outstanding students’ discourse weakened other students’ motivation to answer questions.

2). Some boys attract teachers’ attention by intentionally showing off, while girls leave unsolicited comments in the comments section to participate in class discussions, but teachers pay special attention to boys who disrupt class or are inattentive and would compensate for lagging academics by offering opportunities to answer questions, while girls receive only verbal encouragement. Yet excessive periods of on-the-spot reflection left for warning purposes also crowded out other students’ opportunities to participate.

3). Students’ responses to questions need to be strictly limited by the teacher in terms of content and timing, with normative standard expected answers, and subject to teacher manipulation of the timing of the allocation of the discourse turns in regulating the conversation and enhancing classroom efficiency while depriving students of the process of knowledge construction. More opportunities and power for students to participate in classroom discourse discussions help improve students' language production, language transmission, and language interpretation.

Based on this, the text proposes to pay attention to the classroom participation of marginalized students, to be alert to the negative impact of gender-difference dialogue, to recognize students’ classroom contributions and to avoid excessive manipulation.