Cited by 187Teacher Education and Leadership StudiesMathematics Education and Teaching TechniquesEvaluation of Teaching Practices

Teacher professional development as a means of transforming student classroom talk

Open access
Sedova, Klara, Sedlacek, Martin, Svaricek, Roman·2016·Teaching and Teacher Education

Abstract

This study deals with the impact of a teacher development programme focused on the implementation of dialogic teaching practice. Four indicators of dialogic teaching were measured: student talk with reasoning, teachers' open questions of high cognitive demand, teacher uptake, and open discussion. An analysis of video recordings made before and after the programme showed a change in classroom discourse and an increase in the amount of student talk with reasoning, attributed to changes in teacher communication behaviour. The participants were eight Czech teachers in lower secondary schools who took part in a one-year action research teacher development programme.

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.tate.2016.03.005

Cites

60 of 60 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?

  • Teachers perceive the presence of a video camera in a lesson very negatively, and there is a significant increase in the likelihood that they will refuse to participate in research.

    “We know from previous field studies (e.g., Sedova et al., 2014;Sedova et al., 2016;Sedova et al., 2017) that teachers perceive the presence of a video camera in a lesson very negatively and there is a significant increase in the likelihood that they will refuse to participate in the research.”

    From Do those who talk more learn more? The relationship between student classroom talk and student achievement (2019) · cites this paper as Sedova et al., 2016

    Section 4.4 (Data; page unavailable) says that participants felt a threat of being evaluated during videotaping, which supports some discomfort. It does not say teachers viewed the camera very negatively or that videotaping significantly increased refusals to participate; it reports that consent was obtained and no participant withdrew. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

2 of the 62 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Kumpulainen, K., & Lipponen, L. (2010). Productive interaction as agentic partici- pation in dialogic enquiry. In K. Littleton, & C. Howe (Eds.), Educational di- alogues: Understanding and promoting productive interaction (pp. 48e63). London, New York: Routledge.
  2. Kutnick, P., & Colwell, J. (2010). Dialogue enhancement in classrooms. Towards a relations approach for group working. In K. Littleton, & C. Howe (Eds.), Educa- tional dialogues: Understanding and promoting productive interaction (pp. 192e215). London, New York: Routledge.
  3. Molinari, L., & Mameli, C. (2015). Triadick e interakce ve výukov e komunikaci [Triadic interactions in classroom discourse]. Studia paedagogica, 20(3), 9e28.
  4. Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in science classrooms. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
  5. Nystrand, M., Gamoran, A., Kachur, R., & Prendergast, C. (1997). Opening dialogue. Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York, London: Teachers College Press.
  6. Segal, A., & Lefstein, A. (2015). Exuberant voiceless participation: Dialogic sensibilities in the Israel primary classroom. Retrieved December 15, 2015 http://www. academia.edu/11519244/WP156_Segal_and_Lefstein_2015._Exuberant_ voiceless_participation_Dialogic_sensibilities_in_the_primary_classroom.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sedova, K., Sedlacek, M., & Svaricek, R.
Venue
Teaching and Teacher Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-07
Volume
57
Pages
14-25
ISSN
0742-051X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2303244989
Cited by
179
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 7
FWCI
73.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Teaching and Teacher Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Czech Science Foundation (GA13-23578S)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
Keywords
dialogic teaching, teacher professional development, open discussion, classroom discourse, junior high school teachers

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