Teacher–Student Dialogue During Classroom Teaching: Does It Really Impact on Student Outcomes?

References

• Adey, P., & Shayer, M. (2015). The effects of cognitive acceleration. In L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 127–140). Washington, D.C: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Ahmed, A., Howe, C., Major, L., Hennessy, S., Mercer, N., & Warwick, P. (2018). Developing a test of reasoning for preadolescents. Manuscript in preparation.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, R. (2008). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. Cambridge, UK: Dialogos.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, R., Hardman, F., & Hardman, J. (2017). Changing talk, changing thinking. Interim Report from the In-house Evaluation of the CPRT/UoY Dialogic Teaching Project. Retrieved from www.robinalexander.org.uk
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, A., Howe, C., Soden, R., Halliday, J., & Low, J. (2001). Peer interaction and the learning of critical thinking skills in further education students. Instructional Science, 29, 1–32. doi:10.1023/A:1026471702353
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school English. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 685–730. doi:10.3102/00028312040003685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Benjamini, Y., Krieger, A. M., & Yekutieli, D. (2006). Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate. Biometrika, 93, 491–507. doi:10.1093/biomet/93.3.491
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyd, M. P., & Markarian, W. C. (2011). Dialogic teaching: Talk in service of a dialogic stance. Language and Education, 25, 515–534. doi:10.1080/09500782.2011.597861
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 815–843. doi:10.1002/tea.20171
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chinn, C. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1998). The structure of discussions that promote reasoning. Teachers College Record, 100(2), 315–368.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R. C., & Waggoner, M. A. (2001). Patterns of discourse in two kinds of literature discussion. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 378–411. doi:10.1598/rrq.36.4.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, D., Xu, L. H., & Wan, M. E. V. (2010). Student speech as an instructional priority: Mathematics classrooms in seven culturally-differentiated cities. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 3811–3817. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.595
   Google Scholar
• Damon, W., & Phelps, E. (1989). Critical distinctions among three approaches to peer education. International Journal of Educational Research, 5, 9–19. doi:10.1016/0883-0355(89)90013-X
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, H. (2001). Vygotsky and pedagogy. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
   Google Scholar
• Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Firestone, G., & Brody, N. (1975). Longitudinal investigation of teacher-student interactions and their relations to academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology., 67, 544–550. doi:10.1037/h0076994
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1995). A dialogue: Culture, language and race. Harvard Educational Review, 65, 377–402. doi:10.17763/haer.65.3.12g1923330p1xhj8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fung, D., & Howe, C. (2014). Group work and the learning of critical thinking in the Hong Kong secondary liberal studies curriculum. Cambridge Journal of Education, 44, 245–270. doi:10.1080/0305764X.2014.897685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ginsburg, A., & Smith, M. S. (2016). Do randomized controlled trials meet the “gold standard”? A study of the usefulness of RCTs in what works clearinghouse. Report from American Enterprise Institute. Retrieved from www.carnegiefoundation.org
   Google Scholar
• GL Assessment. (2013). PASS: Pupil attitudes to self and school. London, UK: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Haneda, M., Teemant, A., & Sherman, B. (2017). Instructional coaching through dialogic interaction: Helping a teacher to become agentive in her practice. Language and Education, 31, 46–64. doi:10.1060/09500782.2016.1230127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haneda, M., & Wells, G. (2008). Learning an additional language through dialogic inquiry. Language and Education, 22, 114–136. doi:10.2167/le730.0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattie, J. A. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hennessy, S., Dragovic, T., & Warwick, P. (2017). A research-informed, school-based professional development workshop programme to promote dialogic teaching with interactive technologies. Professional Development in Education, 44, 1–24. doi:10.1080/19415257.2016.128653
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hennessy, S., Rojas-Drummond, S., Higham, R., Márquez, A. M., Maine, F., Ríos, R. M., … Barrera, M. J. (2016). Developing a coding scheme for analysing classroom dialogue across educational contexts. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 9, 16–44. doi:10.1016/j.lcsi.2015.1.2.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrenkohl, L. R., Palincsar, A. S., DeWater, L. S., & Kawasaki, K. (1999). Developing scientific communities in classrooms: A sociocognitive approach. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 451–493. doi:10.1080/10508406.1999.9672076
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins, S. (2013). Self-regulation and learning: Evidence from meta-analysis and from classrooms. British Journal of Educational Psychology Monograph Series II, 10, 111–126.
   Google Scholar
• Howe, C. (2009). Collaborative group work in middle childhood: Joint construction, unresolved contradiction and the growth of knowledge. Human Development, 52, 215–239. doi:10.1159/000215072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howe, C. (2010). Peer groups and children’s development. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Howe, C., & Abedin, M. (2013). Classroom dialogue: A systematic review across four decades of research. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43, 325–356. doi:10.1080/0305764X.2013.786024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howe, C., & Mercer, N. (2007). Children’s social development, peer interaction and classroom learning. In The Primary Review (Research Survey 2/1b). Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Howe, C., Tolmie, A., Duchak-Tanner, V., & Rattray, C. (2000). Hypothesis testing in science: Group consensus and the acquisition of conceptual and procedural knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 10, 361–391. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00004-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howe, C., Tolmie, A., Thurston, A., Topping, K., Christie, D., Livingston, K., … Donaldson, C. (2007). Group work in elementary science: Towards organisational principles for supporting pupil learning. Learning and Instruction, 17, 549–563. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howe, C., & Zachariou, A. (2017). Small-group collaboration and individual knowledge acquisition: The processes of growth during adolescence and early adulthood. Learning and Instruction, Advance online publication. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.10.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, D. C. (1973). An experimental investigation of the effects of pupil responding and teacher reacting on pupil achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 10, 21–37. doi:10.3102/00028312010001021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jurkowski, S., & Hänze, M. (2015). How to increase the benefits of cooperation: Effects of training in transactive communication on cooperative learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 357–371. doi:10.1111/bjep.12077
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumpulainen, K., & Lipponen, L. (2010). Productive interaction as agentic participation in dialogic enquiry. In K. Littleton & C. Howe (Eds.), Educational dialogues: Understanding and promoting productive interaction (pp. 48–63). London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kutnick, P., & Blatchford, P. (2014). Effective group work in primary school classrooms: The SPRinG approach. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Larrain, A., Howe, C., & Friere, P. (2018). ‘More is not necessarily better’: Curriculum materials support the impact of classroom argumentative dialogue in science teaching on content knowledge. Research in Science and Technological Education, 36, 282–301. doi:10.1080/02635143.2017.1408581
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lefstein, A. (2010). More helpful as problem than solution: Some implications of situating dialogue in classrooms. In K. Littleton & C. Howe (Eds.), Educational dialogues: Understanding and promoting productive interaction (pp. 170–191). London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lefstein, A., & Snell, J. (2014). Better than best practice: Developing teaching and learning through dialogue. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Leonard, S., Lamb, H., Howe, P., & Choudhoury, A. (2017). ‘State of the nation’ report of UK primary science education. Baseline Research for the Wellcome Trust Primary Science Campaign. Retrieved from https://wellcome.ac.uk/sites/default/files/state-of-the-nation-report-of-uk-science-education.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Littleton, K., & Howe, C. (2010). Introduction. In K. Littleton & C. Howe (Eds.), Educational dialogues: Understanding and promoting productive interaction (pp. 1–7). London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Luckner, A. E., & Pianta, R. C. (2011). Teacher-student interactions in fifth grade classrooms: Relations with children’s peer behavior. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 32, 257–266. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2011.02.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maas, C. J. M., & Hox, J. J. (2005). Sufficient sample size for multilevel modeling. Methodology, 1, 86–92. doi:10/1027/1614-1881.1.386
   Google Scholar
• Matusov, E. (2009). Journey into dialogic pedagogy. New York, NY: Nova Science.
   Google Scholar
• Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., & Dawes, L. (2008). The value of exploratory talk. In N. Mercer & S. Hodgkinson (Eds.), Exploring talk in school (pp. 55–71). London, UK: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., Dawes, R., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: Ways of helping children to use language to learn science. British Educational Research Journal, 30, 367–385. doi:10.1080/01411920410001689689
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., & Sams, C. (2006). Teaching children how to use language to solve maths problems. Language and Education, 20, 507–528. doi:10.2167/le678.0
   Google Scholar
• Michaels, S., O’Connor, C., & Resnick, L. B. (2008). Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: Accountable talk in the classroom and civic life. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27, 283–297. doi:10.1007/s11217-007-9071-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, G. A., & Chapman, J. P. (2001). Misunderstanding analysis of covariance. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 110, 40–48. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.110.1.40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Meaning making in science classrooms. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Muhonen, H., Pakarinen, E., Poikkeus, A.-M., Lerkkanen, M.-K., & Rasku-Puttonen, H. (2018). Quality of educational dialogue and association with students’ academic performance. Learning and Instruction, 55, 67–79. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.09.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nystrand, M. (2006). Research on the role of classroom discourse as it affects reading comprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 40(4), 392–412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nystrand, M., Wu, L. L., Gamoran, A., Zeiser, S., & Long, D. A. (2003). Questions in time: Investigating the structure and dynamics of unfolding classroom discourse. Discourse Processes, 35, 135–198. doi:10.1207/S15326950DP3502_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connor, C., Michaels, S., & Chapin, S. (2015). ‘Scaling down’ to explore the role of talk in learning: From district intervention to controlled classroom study. In L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 111–126). Washington, D.C: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, J., Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Monk, M. (2001). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. School Science Review, 82(301), 63–70.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, J., Simon, S., Christodoulou, A., Howell-Richardson, C., & Richardson, K. (2013). Learning to argue: A study of four schools and their attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common instructional practice and its impact on students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 315–347. doi:10.1002/tea.21073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pauli, C., & Reusser, K. (2015). Discursive cultures of learning in (everyday) mathematics teaching: A video-based study on mathematics teaching in German and Swiss classrooms. In L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 181–193). Washington, D.C: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Pehmer, A. K., Gröschner, A., & Seidel, T. (2015). Fostering and scaffolding student engagement in productive classroom discourse: Teachers’ practice changes and reflections in light of teacher professional development. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 7, 12–27. doi:10.1016/j.lcsi.2015.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piaget, J. (1959). Judgment and reasoning in the child. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield Adams.
   Google Scholar
• Pimentel, S. D., & McNeill, K. L. (2013). Conducting talk in secondary science classrooms: Investigating instructional moves and teachers’ beliefs. Science Education, 97, 367–394. doi:10.1002/sce.21061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 36, 717–731. doi:10.3758/BF03206553
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Reznitskaya, A., & Gregory, M. (2013). Student thought and classroom language: Examining the mechanisms of change in dialogic teaching. Educational Psychologist, 48, 114–133. doi:10.1080/00461520.2013.775898
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reznitskaya, A., Kuo, L.-J., Clark, A.-M., Miller, B., Jadallah, M., Anderson, R. C., & Nguyen-Jahiel, K. (2009). Collaborative reasoning: A dialogic approach to group discussions. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39, 29–48. doi:10.1080/03057640802701952
   Google Scholar
• Richter, F. D., & Tjosvold, D. (1980). Effects of student participation in classroom decision making on attitudes, peer interaction, motivation, and learning. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 74–80. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.65.1.74
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rojas-Drummond, S., Littleton, K., Hernandez, F., & Zuniga, M. (2010). Dialogical interactions among peers in collaborative writing contexts. In K. Littleton & C. Howe (Eds.), Educational dialogues: Understanding and promoting productive interaction (pp. 128–148). London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ruthven, K., Mercer, N., Taber, K. S., Guardia, P., Hofmann, R., Ilie, S., … Riga, F. (2017). A research-informed dialogic-teaching approach to early secondary school mathematics and science: The pedagogical design and field trial of the epiSTEMe intervention. Research Papers in Education, 32, 18–40. doi:10.1080/02671522.2015.1129642
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz, B. B. (2009). Argumentation and learning. In N. M. Mirza & A.-N. Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices (pp. 91–126). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Sedova, K., Sedlacek, M., & Svaricek, R. (2016). Teacher professional development as a means of transforming student classroom talk. Teaching and Teacher Education, 57, 14–25. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.03.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair, J. M. H., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by pupils and teachers. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Trickey, S., & Topping, K. (2004). Philosophy for children: A systematic review. Research Papers in Education, 19, 365–380. doi:10.1080/0267152042000248016
   Google Scholar
• van der Veen, C., de Mey, L., van Kruistum, C., & van Oers, B. (2017). The effect of productive classroom talk and metacommunication on young children’s oral communicative competence and subject matter knowledge: An intervention study in early childhood education. Learning and Instruction, 48, 14–22. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vrikki, M., Wheatley, L., Howe, C., Hennessy, S., & Mercer, N. (2018). Dialogic practices in primary school classrooms. Language and Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/09500782.2018.1509988
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. (1998). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Volume 5: Child psychology. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
   Google Scholar
• Webb, N. M., Franke, M. L., De, T., Chan, A. G., Freund, D., Shein, P., & Melkonian, D. K. (2009). ‘Explain to your partner’: Teachers’ instructional practices and students’ dialogue in small groups. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39, 49–70. doi:10.1080/03057640802701986
   Google Scholar
• Wegerif, R. (2013). Dialogic: Education for the internet age. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wells, G., & Arauz, R. M. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 379–428. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1503_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wertsch, J. V. (1990). The voice of rationality in a sociocultural approach to mind. In L. C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 111–126). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, I. A. G., Reznitskaya, A., Bourdage, K., Oyler, J., Glina, M., Drewry, R., … Nelson, K. (2017). Toward a more dialogic pedagogy: Changing teachers’ beliefs and practices through professional development in language arts classrooms. Language and Education, 31, 65–82. doi:10.1080/09500782.2016.1230129
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar