Cited by 606Communication in Education and HealthcareEducational Environments and Student OutcomesInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Classroom dialogue: a systematic review across four decades of research

Howe, Christine, Abedin, Manzoorul·2013·Cambridge Journal of Education

Abstract

Recognizing that empirical research into classroom dialogue has been conducted for about 40 years, a review is reported of 225 studies published between 1972 and 2011. The studies were identified through systematic search of electronic databases and scrutiny of publication reference lists. They focus on classroom dialogue in primary and secondary classrooms, covering the full age range of compulsory schooling. The methods of data collection and analysis used in the studies are described and discussed, with changes and continuities over time highlighted. Study results are then summarized and integrated to present a succinct picture of what is currently known and where future research might profitably be directed. One key message is that much more is known about how classroom dialogue is organized than about whether certain modes of organization are more beneficial than others. Moreover, epistemological and methodological change may be required if the situation is to be remedied.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0305764x.2013.786024

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Howe and Abedin (2013) conclude that many studies of teacher-student dialogue are concerned with effectiveness, but the modal approach is to analyze sampled dialogue qualitatively for compliance with models of effective practice whose appropriateness is presumed rather than tested, so student outcomes have seldom been assessed.

    “reviewing them, Howe and Abedin (2013) conclude that many are concerned with effectiveness.”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 256 · Cited by 606

Authors
Howe, C., & Abedin, M.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Howe, Christine
Venue
Cambridge Journal of Education
Published
2013-09
Volume
43
Issue
3
Pages
325-356
ISSN
  • 0305-764X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-3577
OpenAlex
W1998827834
Cited by
606
References
256
Citations by year
2026: 53 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 88 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 2
FWCI
2.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cambridge Journal of Education (publishedVersion)
  • Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Communication in Education and Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Environments and Student Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
classroom dialogue, classroom discourse, discourse structure, primary education, secondary education, compulsory education, research trends, epistemological change, methodological change

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