CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 348Language, Discourse, Communication StrategiesEvaluation of Teaching PracticesLinguistics and Education Research

Developing a coding scheme for analysing classroom dialogue across educational contexts

Open access
Hennessy, Sara, Rojas-Drummond, Sylvia, Higham, Rupert, Márquez, Ana María, Maine, Fiona, Ríos, Rosa María, García-Carrión, Rocío, Torreblanca, Omar +1 more·2016·Learning, Culture and Social Interaction
DOI 10.1016/j.lcsi.2015.12.001
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The research reported sought to develop a framework for systematically analysing classroom dialogue for application across a range of educational settings. The paper outlines the development and refinement of a coding scheme that attempts to represent and operationalise commonalities amongst some key theorists in the field concerning productive forms of educational dialogue. The team has tested it using video recordings from classroom settings in the UK and Mexico, across age phases, subject areas, and different interactional contexts including whole class, group and paired work. Our Scheme for Educational Dialogue Analysis (SEDA) is situated within a sociocultural paradigm, and draws on Hymes' Ethnography of Communication to highlight the importance of context. We examined how such a tool could be used in practice. We found that concentrating on the ‘communicative act’ to explore dialogue between participants was an appropriate level of granularity, while clustering the 33 resulting codes according to function of the acts helped to highlight dialogic sequences within lessons. We report on the application of the scheme in two different learning contexts and reflect on its fitness for purpose, including perceived limitations. Development of specialised sub-schemes and a version for teachers is underway.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.lcsi.2015.12.001

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 66

  1. Agresti, A. (1992). Modelling patterns of agreement and disagreement. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 1(2), 201-218.
  2. Alexander, R. J. (2001). Culture and pedagogy: International comparisons in primary education. Oxford: Blackwell.
  3. Alexander, R. J. (2008). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (4th ed.). York: Dialogos.
  4. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
  5. Barrera-Olmedo, M. J. (2015). Cultural differences in the study of dialogic interactions in classroom settings: A comparison of Mexico, Chile and England. (Unpublished Masters thesis) University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
  6. Biesta, G. J. J. (2001). How difficult should education be? Educational Theory, 51(4), 385-4000.
  7. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  8. Craft, A. (2000). Creativity across the curriculum: Framing and developing practice. London: Routledge.
  9. Elbers, E. (1996). Cooperation and social context in adult-child interaction. Learning and Instruction, 6(4), 281-286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(96)00016-3. · DOI
  10. Feito, J. A. (2007). Allowing not-knowing in a dialogic discussion. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(1) (Article 5. Retrieved from http:// academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v1n1/feito/ij_feito.htm).
  11. Fernández, M., Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., & Rojas-Drummond, S. M. (2001). Reconceptualising "scaffolding" and the zone of proximal development in the context of symmetrical collaborative learning. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 36, 40-54.
  12. Fisher, R. (2007). Dialogic teaching: Developing thinking and metacognition through philosophical discussion. Early Child Development and Care, 177(6-7), 615-631. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430701378985. · DOI
  13. Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London: Penguin.
  14. Gee, J. P., & Green, J. (1998). Discourse analysis, learning and social practice. Review of Research in Education, 23, 119-169.
  15. Grau, V., Calcagni, E., & Preiss, D. (2015). Teacher professional development using classroom videos: effects on dialogic practices. Paper presented at Biennial conference of the European Association for Research in Learning and Instruction (EARLI), Limassol, Cyprus.
  16. Hennessy, S. (2011). The role of digital artefacts on the interactive whiteboard in mediating dialogic teaching and learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(6), 463-586. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00416.x. · DOI
  17. Hennessy, S., Mercer, N., & Warwick, P. (2011). A dialogic inquiry approach to working with teachers in developing classroom dialogue. Teachers College Record, 113(9), 1906-1959. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2011.554704. · DOI
  18. Higham, R. J. E., Brindley, S., & Van de Pol, J. (2014). Shifting the primary focus: Assessing the case for dialogic education in secondary classrooms. Language and Education, 28(1), 86-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2013.771655. · DOI
  19. Howe, C. (2010). Peer groups and children's development. Oxford: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781444318098. · DOI
  20. Howe, C., & Abedin, M. (2013). Classroom dialogue: A systematic review across four decades of research. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43, 325-356. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/0305764X.2013.786024. · DOI · Paper page
  21. Hymes, D. (1972). Models of interaction in language and social life. In J. J. Gumperz, & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication (pp. 35-71). London: Basil Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470758434.ch1. · DOI
  22. Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13-23). Phil- adelphia: John Benjamins.
  23. Jewitt, C. (2005). Multimodality, "reading" and "writing" for the twenty-first century. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 26, 315-331. http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/01596300500200011. · DOI
  24. Kazepides, T. (2012). Education as dialogue. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(9), 913-925.
  25. Kumpulainen, K., & Lipponen, L. (2010). Productive interaction as agentic participation in dialogic enquiry. In K. Littleton, & C. Howe (Eds.), Educational dialogues. Un- derstanding and promoting productive interaction (pp. 48-63). London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203863510. · DOI
  26. Larkin, S. (2009). Socially mediated metacognition and learning to write. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4(3), 149-159.
  27. Lefstein, A., Snell, J., & Israeli, M. (2015). From moves to sequences: Expanding the unit of analysis in the study of classroom discourse. British Educational Research Journal. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/berj.3164. · DOI
  28. Littleton, K., & Mercer, N. (2013). Interthinking: Putting talk to work. Abingdon: Routledge.
  29. Maine, F. (2015). Dialogic readers: Children talking and thinking together about visual texts. London: Routledge.
  30. Maybin, J. (2003). Voices, intertextuality and induction into schooling. In S. Goodman, S. Lillis, J. Maybin, & N. Mercer (Eds.), Language, literacy and education: A reader. Staffordshire, UK: Trentham Books.
  31. Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: How we use language to think together. London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203464984. · DOI
  32. Mercer, N., & Howe, C. (2012). Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1, 12-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.03.001. · DOI
  33. Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children's thinking: A socio-cultural approach. London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/ 9780203946657. · DOI
  34. Mercer, N., Hennessy, S., & Warwick, P. (2010). Using interactive whiteboards to orchestrate classroom dialogue. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 195-209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1475939x.2010.491230. · DOI
  35. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1968). The visible and the invisible. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
  36. Michaels, S., O'Connor, C., & Resnick, L. B. (2008). Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: Accountable talk in the classroom and civic life. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27(4), 283-297.
  37. Müller-Mirza, N., & Perret-Clermont, A. N. (Eds.). (2009). Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London, NewYork: Springer.
  38. Myhill, D. (2006). Talk, talk, talk: Teaching and learning in whole class discourse. Research Papers in Education, 21(1), 19-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 02671520500445425. · DOI
  39. Nystrand, M., Wu, A., Gamoran, A., Zeiser, S., & Long, D. A. (2003). Questions in time: Investigating the structure and dynamics of unfolding classroom discourse. Discourse Processes, 35(3), 135-198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3502_3. · DOI
  40. Osborne, J., Berson, E., Borko, H., Busch, K. C., Zaccarelli, F. G., Million, S., & Tseng, A. (2015, Aug 25-29,). Assessing the quality of classroom discourse in science classrooms. 16th biennial conference of the European Association for Research in Learning and Instruction, Limassol, Cyprus (751).
  41. Renshaw, P., & Brown, R. (1999). Relating everyday and scientific discourse in the classroom: Interweaving, replacement, or pastiche? 8th biennial conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Goteborg, Sweden, (413-415). 24-28 Aug, 1999.
  42. Resnick, L. B., Michaels, S., & O'Connor, C. (2010). How (well structured) talk builds the mind. In D. Preiss, & R. Sternberg (Eds.), Innovations in educational psychology (pp. 163-194). New York, NY: Springer.
  43. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  44. Rojas-Drummond, S. M. (2000). Guided participation, discourse and the construction of knowledge in Mexican classrooms. In H. Cowie, D. van der Aalsvoort, & N. Mercer (Eds.), Social interaction in learning and instruction: The meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp. 193-213). Exeter: Pergamon Press.
  45. Rojas-Drummond, S. M., & Mercer, N. (2003). Scaffolding the development of effective collaboration and learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(1-2), 99-111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00075-2. · DOI
  46. Rojas-Drummond, S. M., Mazón, N., Fernández, M., & Wegerif, R. (2006). Explicit reasoning, creativity and co-construction in primary school children's collaborative activities. Journal of Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(2), 84-94.
  47. Rojas-Drummond, S. M., Pérez, V., Vélez, M., Gómez, L., & Mendoza, A. (2003). Talking for reasoning among Mexican primary school children. Learning and Instruction, 13(6), 653-670. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(03)00003-3. · DOI
  48. Rojas-Drummond, S., Littleton, K., Hernández, F., & Zúñiga, M. (2010). Dialogical interactions among peers in collaborative writing contexts. In K. Littleton, & C. Howe (Eds.), Educational dialogues: Understanding and promoting productive interaction (pp. 128-148). Abingdon, Roxon: Routledge.
  49. Rojas-Drummond, S., Torreblanca, O., Pedraza, H., Vélez, M., & Guzmán, K. (2013). 'Dialogic scaffolding': Enhancing learning and understanding in collaborative contexts. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2(1), 11-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.12.003. · DOI
  50. Saville-Troike, M. (2003). The ethnography of communication: An introduction (3rd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
  51. Sedova, K., Salamounova, Z., & Svaricek, R. (2014). Troubles with dialogic teaching. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 3(4), 274-285.
  52. Sidorkin, A. (1999). The fine art of sitting on two stools: Multicultural education between postmodernism and critical theory. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 18(3), 143-156.
  53. Soter, A. O., Wilkinson, I. A., Murphy, P. K., Rudge, L., Rennger, K., & Edwards, M. (2008). What the discourse tells us: Talk and indicators of high-level comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 47(6), 372-391.
  54. Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  55. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  56. Warrens, M. J. (2014). New interpretation of Cohen's kappa. Journal of Mathematics, 203907. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/203907. · DOI
  57. Warwick, P., Mercer, N., Kershner, R., & Kleine Staarman, J. (2010). In the mind and in the technology: The vicarious presence of the teacher in pupils' learning of science in collaborative group activity at the interactive whiteboard. Computers & Education, 55(1), 350-362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.001. · DOI
  58. Wegerif, R. (2007). Dialogic, education and technology: Expanding the space of learning. New York: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-71142-3. · DOI
  59. Wegerif, R. (2010). Dialogue and teaching thinking with technology: Opening, expanding and deepening the 'inter-face'. In K. Littleton, & C. Howe (Eds.), Educational dialogues: Understanding and promoting productive interaction. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
  60. Wegerif, R. (2011). Towards a dialogic theory of how children learn to think. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6(3), 179-190.
  61. Wegerif, R., McLaren, B. M., Chamrada, M., Scheuer, O., Mansour, N., Mikšátko, J., et al. (2010). Exploring creative thinking in graphically mediated synchronous dialogues. Computers & Education, 54(3), 613-621.
  62. Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Toward a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  63. Wells, G., & Arauz, R. M. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379-428. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1503_3. · DOI · Paper page
  64. Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  65. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A socio-cultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  66. Wolfe, S. (2006). Teaching and learning through dialogue in primary classrooms in England. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hennessy, S., Rojas-Drummond, S., Higham, R., Márquez, A. M., Maine, F., Ríos, R. M., García-Carrión, R., Torreblanca, O., & Barrera, M. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX)
  • Universidad de Deusto (ES)
Corresponding author
Hennessy, Sara
ORCID
Venue
Learning, Culture and Social Interaction
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-06
Volume
9
Pages
16-44
ISSN
2210-6561 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.lcsi.2015.12.001
OpenAlex
W2300065122
Cited by
348
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 42 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 4
FWCI
112.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Learning Culture and Social Interaction (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DeustoTeka (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
  • British Academy International Partnership and Mobility Scheme (RG66509)
  • Economic and Social Research Council (RES063270081, RES000230825)
  • Dirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico of the National Autonomous University of Mexico (DGAPA-UNAM) (IN303313, PE305814)
  • National Council of Science and Technology (160873)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Linguistics and Education Research
Keywords
classroom dialogue, coding scheme, educational dialogue, communicative acts, sociocultural perspective, classroom interaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review