The Dialogic Possibilities for Interactive Fiction in the Secondary Academy English Classroom

References

• Alexander, R. 2020. A Dialogic Teaching Companion. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, S. 2003. “The Teacher’s Soul and the Terrors of Performativity.” Journal of Education Policy 18 (2): 215–228. doi:10.1080/0268093022000043065.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ball, S., M. Maguire, A. Braun, J. Perryman, and K. Hoskins. 2012. “Assessment Technologies in Schools: ‘Deliverology’ and the ‘Play of Dominations’.” Research Papers in Education 27 (5): 513–533. doi:10.1080/02671522.2010.550012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berry, J. 2012. “Teachers’ Professional Autonomy in England: Are Neo-liberal Approaches Incontestable?” FORUM 54 (3): 397–409. doi:10.2304/forum.2012.54.3.397.
   Google Scholar
• Biesta, G. 2007. “Why ‘What Works’ Won’t Work: Evidence-Based Practice and the Democratic Deficit in Educational Research.” Educational Theory 57 (1): 1–22. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.2006.00241.x.
   Google Scholar
• Biesta, G. 2016. The Beautiful Risk of Education. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Biesta, G. J. J. 2015. Good Education in an Age of Measurement. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Big Ideas Community Interest Company. 2018. “The Unremembered: World War One’s Army of Workers.” Accessed 24th February 2021. https://www.big-ideas.org/project/the-unremembered/
   Google Scholar
• Bleiman, B. 2020. What Matters in English: Collected Blogs and Other Writing. London: English and Media Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Booth, N. 2017. “What Is Formative Assessment, Why Hasn’t It Worked in Schools, and How Can We Make It Better in the Classroom?” Impact. https://impact.chartered.college/article/booth-what-formative-assessment-make-better-classroom/
   Google Scholar
• Buckingham, D. 2003. “Media Education and the End of the Critical Consumer.” Harvard Educational Review 73 (3): 309–327. doi:10.17763/haer.73.3.c149w3g81t381p67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costanzo, W. 1986. “Reading Interactive Fiction: Implications of a New Literary Genre.” Educational Technology 26 (6): 31–35. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44425198
   Google Scholar
• Desilets, B. J. 1989. “Reading, Thinking, and Interactive Fiction.” The English Journal 78 (3): 75–77. doi:10.2307/819460.
   Google Scholar
• Education Endowment Foundation. 2019. “Reciprocal Reading.” EEF. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/projects-and-evaluation/projects/reciprocal-reading/
   Google Scholar
• Education Endowment Foundation. 2020. “Dialogic Teaching.” https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/projects-and-evaluation/projects/dialogic-teaching/
   Google Scholar
• Emirbayer, M., and A. Mische. 1998. “What Is Agency?” American Journal of Sociology 103 (4): 962–1023. doi:10.1086/231294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gawande, A. 2010. The Checklist Manifesto: How To Get Things Right. London: Profile Books.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbons, S. 2019. “Death by PEEL?” the Teaching of Writing in the Secondary English Classroom in England.” English in Education 53 (1): 36–45. doi:10.1080/04250494.2019.1568832.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, F. 2018. “Riding the Reciprocal Teaching Bus. A Teacher’s Reflections on Nurturing Collaborative Learning in A School Culture Obsessed by Results.” Changing English 25 (2): 146–162. doi:10.1080/1358684X.2018.1452606.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giovanelli, M., and J. Mason. 2015. “‘Well I Don’t Feel That’: Schemas, Worlds and Authentic Reading in the Classroom.” English in Education 49 (1): 41–55. doi:10.1111/eie.12052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, D., and R. McGinity. 2015. “Conceptualizing Teacher Professional Identity in Neoliberal Times: Resistance, Compliance and Reform.” Education Policy Analysis Archives 23 (88): 1–21. doi:10.14507/epaa.v23.2092.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, M. 2013. “Meaning as Choice.” Chap. 1. In Systemic Functional Linguistics: Exploring Choice, edited by L. Fontaine, T. Bartlett, and G. O’Grady, 15–36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hennessy, S. 2011. “The Role of Digital Artefacts on the Interactive Whiteboard in Supporting Classroom Dialogue.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 27 (6): 463–489. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00416.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holdstock, S. 2020. “The Doodle.” Itch.io. makingmeanings.itch.io/the-doodle
   Google Scholar
• Holdstock, S. 2021. “What Happens When You Close Your Eyes.” Itch.io. http://www.makingmeanings.itch.io/what-happens-when-you-close-your-eyes
   Google Scholar
• Jogie, M. R. 2015. “Too Pale and Stale: Prescribed Texts Used for Teaching Culturally Diverse Students in Australia and England.” Oxford Review of Education 41 (3): 287–309. doi:10.1080/03054985.2015.1009826.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller, P. A., B. Harlam, G. Loewenstein, and K. G. Volpp. 2011. “Enhanced Active Choice: A New Method to Motivate Behavior Change.” Journal of Consumer Psychology 21 (4): 376–383. doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2011.06.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kopas, M. 2015. “Introduction.” In Videogames for Humans, Twine Authors in Conversation, edited by M. Kopas, 5–19. New York: Instar Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kulz, C. 2018. Factories for Learning. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, S., and J. Holloway. 2019. “Datafying the Teaching ‘Profession’: Remaking the Professional Teacher in the Image of Data.” Cambridge Journal of Education 49 (1): 35–51. doi:10.1080/0305764X.2018.1441373.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyle, S. 2008. “Dialogic Teaching: Discussing Theoretical Contexts and Reviewing Evidence from Classroom Practice.” Language and Education 22 (3): 222–240. doi:10.1080/09500780802152499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maher, J. 2011. “Let’s Tell a Story Together.” Maher.filfre.net. http://www.maher.filfre.net/if-book/
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., S. Hennessy, and P. Warwick. 2010. “Using Interactive Whiteboards to Orchestrate Classroom Dialogue.” Technology, Pedagogy and Education 19 (2): 195–209. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2010.491230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., S. Hennessy, and P. Warwick. 2019. “Dialogue, Thinking Together and Digital Technology in the Classroom: Some Educational Implications of a Continuing Line of Inquiry.” International Journal of Educational Research 97: 187–199. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2017.08.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michaels, S., and C. O’Connor. 2015. “Conceptualizing Talk Moves as Tools: Professional Development Approaches for Academically Productive Discussions.” In Socializing Intelligence through Academic Talk and Dialogue, edited by L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan, and S. N. Clarke, 332–347. Washington: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Moll, L. C., C. Amanti, D. Neff, and N. Gonzalez. 1992. “Funds of Knowledge for Teaching: Using a Qualitative Approach to Connect Homes and Classrooms.” Theory Into Practice 31 (2): 132–141. doi:10.1080/00405849209543534.
   Google Scholar
• Morpurgo, M. 2017. War Horse. London: Egmont.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, P. K., I. A. G. Wilkinson, A. O. Soter, M. N. Hennessey, and J. F. Alexander. 2009. “Examining the Effects of Classroom Discussion on Students’ Comprehension of Text: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Educational Psychology 101 (3): 740–764. doi:10.1037/a0015576.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reznitskaya, A., and I. A. G. Wilkinson. 2017. The Most Reasonable Answer. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, C. R. 1945. “The Nondirective Method as a Technique for Social Research.” American Journal of Sociology 50 (4): 279–283. doi:10.1086/219619.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sosnoski, J. 1999. “Hyper‐Readers and Their Reading Engines.” Chap. 9. In Passions, Politics, and 21st Century Technologies, edited by G. Hawisher and C. Selfie, 161–177. Logan: Utah State University Press‐NCTE.
   Google Scholar
• Stevenson, H. 2017. “The “Datafication” of Teaching: Can Teachers Speak Back to the Numbers?” Peabody Journal of Education 92 (4): 537–557. doi:10.1080/0161956X.2017.1349492.
   Google Scholar
• Sunstein, C. R. 2017. “Misconceptions About Nudges.” SSRN Electronic Journal 2 (1): 61–67. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3033101.
   Google Scholar
• Thaler, R. H., and C. R. Sunstein. 2009. Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Happiness. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thaler, R. H., C. R. Sunstein, and J. P. Balz. 2013. “Choice Architecture.” Chap. 25. In The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy, edited by E. Shafir, 428–439. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thomson, P., and C. Hall. 2008. “Opportunities Missed And/or Thwarted? ‘Funds of Knowledge’ Meet the English National Curriculum.” The Curriculum Journal 19 (2): 87–103. doi:10.1080/09585170802079488.
   Google Scholar
• Watkins, C. 2010. “Learning Performance and Improvement.” Research Matters 34: 1–15. https://www.ioe-rdnetwork.com/uploads/2/1/6/3/21631832/c_watkins_learning_performance_improvement.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wells, G. 1990. “Talk about Text: Where Literacy Is Learned and Taught.” Curriculum Inquiry 20 (4): 369–405. doi:10.1080/03626784.1990.11076083.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, I., and S. Binici. 2015. “Dialogue-Intensive Pedagogies for Promoting Reading Comprehension: What We Know, What We Need to Know.” Chap. 3. In Socializing Intelligence through Academic Talk and Dialogue, edited by L. Resnick and S. Asterhan, 35–48. Washington: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Xerri, D. 2013. “Colluding in the ‘Torture’ of Poetry: Shared Beliefs and Assessment.” English in Education 47 (2): 134–146. doi:10.1111/eie.12012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yandell, J. 2019. “English Teachers and Research: Becoming Our Own Experts.” Changing English 26 (4): 430–441. doi:10.1080/1358684X.2019.1649087.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar