Hi Chiel,

One of the questions on dialogue in the classroom that comes around every now and then to me is how (pedagogic) dialogue in the classroom promotes, or not, encounters between teachers, students and knowledge, in order to create culture as theories of the things, and how those theories are tried, probed or become as matter of refutation through dialogue. I have seen this in primary school as well as with 17 years-old students. Not to say in universities. I believe that the presence or absence of such kind of dialogue is something to be researched, with strong implications on the aspects you highlight. 

Best,

Carlos

One thing I find intriguing is the relation between scaffolding towards specific learning goals and dialogic teaching as opening up spaces for learning. See the introductory paper to a special issue on these themes in ZDM 2015, where we only could touch on this interesting tension. Methodologically it appears to be very hard to measure the fading or transfer of responsibility from teachers to students. And then it seems common knowledge that most teachers find it very difficult to foster productive classroom dialogue, whether inspired by scaffolding or dialogic teaching ideas.

More research would be very valuable on how classroom dialogue (or classroom talk) contributes to how children learn mathematical arguments and mathematical proving in school mathematics. We have a new paper (open access) on secondary school students learning the structure of mathematical proofs but the contribution of classroom dialogue (or classroom talk) is still under-theorised, I would say.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10649-016-9720-9

I'll share what I have done in using the debate to stimulate and motivate students to discuss a class topic. I have found that the competitive nature of the activity drives students to go to lengths to do their research in defending their positions. Here's the link to the conference paper that was presented at the The 16th Annual Midwest Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) Conference, At Indiana University South Bend, Indiana, U.S.A: 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274720155_Debating_A_Dynamic_Teaching_Strategy_for_Motivating_Students_and_Teachers

Best regards,

Debra

Conference Paper Debating: A Dynamic Teaching Strategy for Motivating Student...

I agree with explanation given by Keith Jones

You might want to think about it quantitatively as well as qualitatively. I worked on the SPRinG project (group work in early secondary) in the early 2000s (directed by Maurice Galton in Cambridge and much of the project is written about in the book 'Motivating your secondary class'). Maurice was a pioneer of systematic observation through the ORACLE project in the primary classrooms a number of years earlier and we adopted a similar observation protocol in our case-study classrooms (looking at English Maths and Science). All the research says that students are given few opportunities for 'sustained' dialogue with either teachers or peers and so we need to measure when sort of dialogue is happening, to what extent and in which contexts. The point about systematic observations is that it uses random sampling so picks up on the 'ordinary' students and their exchanges rather than the 'extraordinary'.

I think the question of what experiences 'ordinary' students are having in 'ordinary' classrooms is a crucial one, especially in England in the current climate. Group work in different contexts does seem to be the place to start (though how much actually goes on and what it means in practice is an on-going question).

One practical issue is the lack of professional development pedagogy that would support teachers with making shifts in using the principles of dialogic teaching.  We need research in 'what works' for supporting teachers in developing classroom spaces organized with the hallmarks of dialogic teaching.

Practically, the most pressing question in my mind is why is the sort of dialogic pedagogy being promoted by researchers (and more than a few policy-makers and practitioners) so rare in contemporary classrooms?  And how can we change that?  But this question also has some theoretical aspects as well: 

What do teachers and pupils need to know and be able to do in order to facilitate and/or participate in effective classroom dialogue?  

How can systems be designed to facilitate the development of this knowledge?

And, no less important in my mind, how should our models and conceptions be adapted to make them easier to enact at large scale?  

Methodologically, I still don't think we've cracked the challenges of reliably and validly coding classroom discourse (though see the recent work of Sara Hennessey and colleagues at Cambridge (http://www.educ.cam.ac.uk/research/projects/analysingdialogue/), especially in ways that account for the sequential interdependence of discourse (see here a paper of mine and colleagues' on this topic: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3164/abstract).

I hope this helps,

adam 

Chiel,

I suggest you read the chapter on classroom discourse in the Second Handbook of Research on Science Education (2014).

Norm

I try -within a Freirean approach - to let the student say  "their word", i.e. to integrate their preliminary ideas and underlying life experiences in relation to the topic under discussion. Look at my  et al. piece in SiLT 2016, also mentioned in my public google scholar

Hi Chiel,

One of the questions on dialogue in the classroom that comes around every now and then to me is how (pedagogic) dialogue in the classroom promotes, or not, encounters between teachers, students and knowledge, in order to create culture as theories of the things, and how those theories are tried, probed or become as matter of refutation through dialogue. I have seen this in primary school as well as with 17 years-old students. Not to say in universities. I believe that the presence or absence of such kind of dialogue is something to be researched, with strong implications on the aspects you highlight. 

Best,

Carlos

From a research perspective, I see the need for both basic and applied researchers to work collaboratively at national and international levels to take an ecological view of the variables that best assist individual learners at various ages and stages of development (in the broadest sense, and including socio-emotional, emotional, cognitive, metacognitive, and behavioral).  Without a thorough understanding of the methods and practices underlying learning progress and success over time -- plus a better understanding of cultural dynamics that interact with positive learning and development, we will have an incomplete understanding of the theoretical and practical contributions of classroom dialogue, student voice, and what you refer to as classroom talk.

Volume 31 Issue 1 of the journal Research Papers in Educations is a special issue presenting papers concerned with the relationship between the 'dialogic turn' and educational linguistics. It's worth having a look at for the findings and questions raised.

Jo