Dialogue in the Classroom
Abstract
There is increasing agreement among those who study classrooms that learning is likely to be most effective when students are actively involved in the dialogic coconstruction of meaning about topics that are of significance to them. This article reports the results of an extended collaborative action research project in which teachers attempted to create the conditions for such dialogue by adopting an inquiry approach to the curriculum. A quantitative comparison between observations made early and late in the teachers' involvement in the project showed a number of significant changes in the characteristics of teacher–whole-class discourse, with a shift toward a more dialogic mode of interaction. Nevertheless, the initiation-response-follow-up (IRF) genre continued to be pervasive. Despite this, when the same observations were examined qualitatively, there was clear evidence of an increase over time in the teachers' adoption of a "dialogic stance." The article concludes with a consideration of the relationship between the choice of discourse formats and the enactment of a dialogic stance.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Numerous proposals about classroom verbal interaction recur as five themes: open questions, elaboration of previous contributions, reasoned discussion of competing viewpoints, linkage and coordination across contributions, and meta-cognitive engagement with dialogue.
“Numerous proposals have been made about the characteristics that verbal interaction in classrooms should display in order to optimize student outcomes, but amongst these proposals five themes recur.”
From Teacher–Student Dialogue During Classroom Teaching: Does It Really Impact on Student Outcomes? (2019) · cites this paper as Wells & Arauz, 2006
Many teachers are already being encouraged through professional development programmes to implement the five themes.
“through professional development programmes, many teachers are already being encouraged to implement the themes”
From Teacher–Student Dialogue During Classroom Teaching: Does It Really Impact on Student Outcomes? (2019) · cites this paper as Wells & Arauz, 2006
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 65 · Cited by 515
- Authors
- Wells, G., & Arauz, R. M.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
- ORCID
- Wells, Gordon
- Venue
- Journal of the Learning Sciences
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-07
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 379-428
- ISSN
- 1050-8406 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7809
- OpenAlex
- W2049435271
- Cited by
- 515
- References
- 65
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 24
- FWCI
- 48.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the Learning Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
- Keywords
- classroom dialogue, inquiry-based curriculum, collaborative action research, student engagement
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