Cited by 156Linguistics and Education ResearchLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Dialogic Teaching and Dialogic Stance: Moving beyond Interactional Form

Boyd, Maureen P., Markarian, William C.·2015·Research in the Teaching of English

Abstract

While there is consensus that dialogic teaching should involve a repertoire of teaching and learning talk patterns and approaches, authorities who enjoin teachers to engage in dialogic teaching generally characterize classroom dialogue in terms of surface features such as open questions. But dialogic teaching is not defined by discourse structure so much as by discourse function. When teachers adopt a dialogic instructional stance, they treat dialogue as a functional construct rather than structural, and classroom oracy can thrive. Our research finds that dialogic talk functions to model and support cognitive activity and inquiry and supportive classroom relations, to engage multiple voices and perspectives across time, and to animate student ideas and contributions. Employing narrative analysis and cross-episodic contingency analysis, we tell a story in three episodes about how oracy practices promote dialogic functions in a third-grade classroom. We unpack how a particular teaching exchange—one we have selected specifically for its nondialogic surface appearance—reflects dialogic teaching. Findings show how supportive epistemic and communal functions of classroom talk are more important to successful dialogic teaching and learning than are surface dialogic features. We argue it is necessary to look beyond interactional form and unpack function, uptake, and purpose in classroom discourse. There is no single set of teaching behaviors that is associated with dialogism. Rather,…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.58680/rte201526870

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Previous studies mainly focused on the stances and perspectives of teachers on dialogic practices in language arts classrooms.

    “previous studies mainly focused on the stances and perspectives of teachers on dialogic practices in language arts classrooms (e.g., Barak 2024; Barak and Lefstein 2022;Boyd and Markarian 2015)”
  • In a monologic stance, teachers often ask inauthentic questions that function only to display how well a student's recall aligns with the disseminating message.

    “In this monologic stance, teachers often ask inauthentic questions, which function only to succinctly display how well a student's recall aligns with the disseminating message, how well students can 'perform' knowing (Boyd and Markarian 2015).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boyd, M. P., & Markarian, W. C.
Affiliations
University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
Venue
Research in the Teaching of English
Published
2015-02-01
Volume
49
Issue
3
Pages
272-296
ISSN
  • 0034-527X (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-2348
OpenAlex
W2676113436
Cited by
156
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 1
FWCI
161.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Research in the Teaching of English (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Linguistics and Education Research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
dialogic teaching, classroom discourse, discourse functions, epistemic functions, third-grade classroom, student voice, uptake, dialogism, open problems

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