Dialogic Teaching and Dialogic Stance: Moving beyond Interactional Form
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
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?
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)”
From The Impact of a Dialogic Intervention on a Chinese Rural Teacher and Students' Stances Towards Texts (2025) · cites this paper as 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).”
From The Impact of a Dialogic Intervention on a Chinese Rural Teacher and Students' Stances Towards Texts (2025) · cites this paper as Boyd and Markarian 2015
Cites
Aukerman, M. S. (2007) · Research in the Teaching of English · doi:10.58680/rte20076484 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Teacher professional development as a means of transforming student classroom talk
Sedova, K., Sedlacek, M., & Svaricek, R. (2016) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.03.005 · Cited by 179 · see citing works
The Impact of a Dialogic Intervention on a Chinese Rural Teacher and Students' Stances Towards Texts
Zhong, Y., Davies, M., & Wilson, A. (2025) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.12816 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Boyd, M. P., & Markarian, W. C.
- Affiliations
- University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
- ORCID
- Boyd, Maureen P.
- 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