A Dialogic Inquiry Approach to Working with Teachers in Developing Classroom Dialogue

Abstract

Background/Context

This article describes how we refined an innovative methodology for equitable collaboration between university researchers and classroom practitioners building and refining theory together. The work builds on other coinquiry models in which complementary professional expertise is respected and deliberately exploited in order to question, understand, and improve practice. Drawing on research using digital video to help make explicit teachers’ pedagogical rationale, our approach involved intensive critical scrutiny of video recordings of teachers’ own and others’ practices.

Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study

The study explored and reformulated definitions of classroom dialogue—in which teachers and students exchange, evaluate, and build on ideas—in the context of interactive whiteboard (IWB) use. This article focuses on the collaborative theory-building process itself, whose aim was to exploit insights derived from research to stimulate and inform thinking, guide principled development of new classroom practices, and refine the theory.

Population/Participants/Subjects

Three university researchers and three (primary, middle and secondary school) United Kingdom teachers, along with their students aged 10–14, took part in the research. The teachers were all experienced, reflective practitioners with an established dialogic pedagogy. They taught personal education, English, and history.

Research Design

A case study design was used to collect qualitative observational data. A series of three in-depth workshops focused on the construct of dialogue and critiqued associated literature. Subsequent joint review of lesson videos and other data plus two further workshops served to characterize effective strategies for supporting dialogue.

Data Collection and Analysis

The three initial workshops prepared teachers to design and teach three consecutive lessons employing a dialogic approach supported by IWB use. Teacher and university researcher pairs jointly reviewed the lesson videos, along with unstructured teacher diaries, interviews (three per teacher), and other contextualizing data, and two further team workshops took place. Cross-case analysis of the data, including interview and workshop transcripts, follow-up questionnaires, and accreditation reports, characterized teacher perspectives on the reflexive—and itself dialogic—coinquiry process and its outcomes.

Conclusions

Preconditions, critical features, and scalable benefits of our evolving approach are identified for other research partnerships. The process additionally yielded negotiated, recontextualized understandings of dialogue and strategies for fostering dialogic pedagogy. These were framed in accessible language, spontaneously shared within the schools and adapted for wider use, thus forming a springboard for further critique and modification in new settings.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alexander

R. J.

(1984). Innovation and continuity in the initial teacher education curriculum. In Alexander

R. J.

, Craft

, & Lynch

(Eds.), Change in teacher education: Context and provision since Robbins. (pp. 103–160). London: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Alexander

R. J.

(2004). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. (4th ed.), Cambridge, England: Dialogos UK Ltd.

Armstrong

, & Curran

(2006). Developing a collaborative mode of research using digital video. Computers and Education, 46, 336–347.

Bakhtin

M. N.

(1981). The dialogic imagination. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Bakhtin

M. N.

(1986). The problem of speech genres. In Emerson

, & Holquist

(Eds.), Speech genres and other late essays. (pp. 60–102). Austin: University of Texas Press.

Baumfield

, & Butterworth

(2007). Creating and translating knowledge about teaching and learning in collaborative school-university research partnerships: An analysis of what is exchanged across the partnerships, by whom and how. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13, 411–427.

Bjuland

, & Jaworski

(2009). Teachers’ perspectives on collaboration with didacticians to create an inquiry community. Research in Mathematics Education, 11(1), 21–38.

Bransford

, & Schwartz

(1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. In Iran-Nejad

, & Pearson

(Eds.), Review of Research in Education. (Vol. 24, pp. 61–100). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Brown

(2005). How can research inform ideas of good practice in teaching? The contributions of some official initiatives in the UK. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35, 383–406.

10.

Butler

D. L.

, Laushcer

H. N.

, Jarvis-Selinger

, & Beckingham

(2004). Collaboration and self-regulation in teachers’ professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 435–455.

11.

Cardellichio

, & Field

(1997). Seven strategies that encourage neural branching. Educational Leadership, 54(6), 33–36.

12.

Cobb

, Confrey

, diSessa

, Lehrer

, & Schauble

(2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.

13.

Cooper

, & McIntyre

(1996). Effective teaching and learning: Teachers’ and students’ perspectives. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.

14.

Dawes

, Mercer

, & Wegerif

(2004). Thinking Together: A programme of activities for developing speaking, listening and thinking skills for children aged 8-11. Birmingham, England: Imaginative Minds.

15.

de Freitas

, Oliver

, Mee

, & Mayes

(2008). The practitioner perspective on the modeling of pedagogy and practice. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(1), 26–38.

16.

Deaney

, Ruthven

, & Hennessy

(2006). Teachers’ developing “practical theories” of the contribution of information and communication technologies to subject teaching and learning: An analysis of cases from English secondary schools. British Educational Research Journal, 32, 459–480.

17.

diSessa

(1991). Local sciences: Viewing the design of human-computer systems as cognitive science. In Carroll

J. M.

(Ed.), Designing interaction: Psychology at the human-computer interface. (pp. 162–202). New York: Cambridge University Press.

18.

Edwards

J.-A.

, & Jones

(2003). Co-learning in the collaborative mathematics classroom. In Peter-Koop

, Begg

, Breen

, & Santos-Wagner

(Eds.), Collaboration in teacher education: Examples from the context of mathematics education. (pp. 135–151). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

19.

Elden

(1981). Sharing the research work: Participative research and its role demands. In Reason

, & Rowan

(Eds.), Human inquiry: A sourcebook of new paradigm research. (pp. 253–266). Chichester, England: Wiley.

20.

Elliott

(2004). Using research to improve practice: The notion of evidence-based practice. In Day

, & Sachs

(Eds.), International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers. (pp. 264–290). Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.

21.

Feito

J. A.

(2007). Allowing not-knowing in a dialogic discussion. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1. Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v1n1/feito/ij_feito.htm

22.

Fisler

J. L.

, & Firestone

W. A.

(2006). Teacher learning in a school-university partnership: Exploring the role of social trust and teaching efficacy beliefs. Teachers College Record, 108, 1155–1185.

23.

Gillen

, Kleine Staarman

, Littleton

, Mercer

, & Twiner

(2007). A “learning revolution”? Investigating pedagogic practice around interactive whiteboards in British primary schools. Learning, Media and Technology, 32, 243–256.

24.

Goodchild

(2007). Inside the outside: Seeking evidence of didacticians’ learning by expansion. In Jaworski

, Fuglestad

A. B.

, Bjuland

, Breiteig

, Goodchild

, & Grevholm

(Eds.), Learning communities in mathematics. (pp. 189–203). Straume, Norway: Caspar Forlag.

25.

Groundwater-Smith

, & Dadds

(2004). Critical practitioner inquiry: Towards responsible professional communities of practice. In Day

, & Sachs

(Eds.), International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers. (pp. 238–263). Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.

26.

Hargreaves

D. H.

(1999). The knowledge-creating school. British Journal of Educational Studies, 47, 122–144.

27.

Hennessy

(2011). The role of digital artefacts on the interactive whiteboard in mediating dialogic teaching and learning. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00416.x.

28.

Hennessy

, & Deaney

(2009a). The impact of collaborative video analysis by practitioners and researchers upon pedagogical thinking and practice: A follow-up study. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15, 617–638.

29.

Hennessy

, & Deaney

(2009b). “Intermediate theory” building: Integrating multiple teacher and researcher perspectives through in-depth video analysis of pedagogic strategies. Teachers College Record, 111, 1753–1795.

30.

Hennessy

, Deaney

, Dawes

, & Bowker

(2008). Supporting professional development for ICT use in the secondary classroom using a multimedia resource: Final Report to NCETM. Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge

England.

31.

Hennessy

, Deaney

, Ruthven

, & Winterbottom

(2007). Pedagogical strategies for using the interactive whiteboard to foster learner participation in school science. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 283–301.

32.

Hiebert

, Gallimore

, & Stigler

(2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: What would it look like and how can we get one? [Electronic version]. Educational Researcher, 31, 3–15. Retrieved September 2009 from https://www-jstor-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/3594422.

33.

Howe

, Tolmie

, Thurston

, Topping

, Christie

, Livingston

(2007). Group work in elementary science: Towards organisational principles for supporting pupil learning. Learning and Instruction, 17, 549–563.

34.

Jaworski

(2006). Theory and practice in mathematics teaching development: Critical inquiry as a mode of learning in teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 187–211.

35.

Jaworski

(2007). Introducing LCM—Learning Communities in Mathematics. In Jaworski

, Fuglestad

A. B.

, Bjuland

, Breiteig

, Goodchild

, & Grevholm

(Eds.), Learning communities in mathematics. (pp. 13–25). Straume, Norway: Caspar Forlag.

36.

Jones

, Tanner

, Kennewell

, Parkinson

, Denny

, Anthony

(2009). Using video stimulated reflective dialogue to support the development of ICT based pedagogy in mathematics and science. Welsh Journal of Education, 14(2), 63–77.

37.

Leat

(2009). Thinking differently about research outputs [Electronic version]. Research Intelligence: News from the British Educational Research Association. Retrieved September 9, 2009, from http://www.bera.ac.uk/files/2009/01/ri105-final.pdf

38.

Lesh

, & Lehrer

(2000). Iterative refinement cycles for videotape analyses of conceptual change. In Kelly

, & Lesh

(Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education. (pp. 665–708). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.

39.

Marx

R. W.

, Blumenfeld

P. C.

, Krajik

J. S.

, & Soloway

(1998). New technologies for teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14, 33–52.

40.

McIntyre

(2005). Bridging the gap between research and practice. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35, 357–382.

41.

McLaughlin

, Black-Hawkins

, Brindley

, McIntyre

, & Taber

(2006). Researching schools: Stories from a school-university partnership for educational research. Abingdon, England: Routledge.

42.

Mercer

(2000). Words and minds: How we use language to think together. New York: Routledge.

43.

Mercer

(2004). Sociocultural discourse analysis: Analysing classroom talk as a social mode of thinking. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1, 137–168.

44.

Mercer

, Hennessy

, & Warwick

(2010). Using interactive whiteboards to orchestrate classroom dialogue. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 195–209.

45.

Mercer

, & Littleton

(2007). Dialogue and the development of children's thinking. London: Routledge.

46.

Mercer

, & Scott

(2007). Dialogic teaching in science classrooms: Final Report to ESRC. (No. RES-000-23-0939).

47.

Miller

, & Glover

(2007). Into the unknown: The professional development induction experience of secondary mathematics teachers using interactive whiteboard technology. Learning, Media and Technology, 32, 319–332.

48.

Mortimer

E. F.

, & Scott

P. H.

(2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.

49.

Nuthall

(2004). Relating classroom teaching to student learning: a critical analysis of why research has failed to bridge the theory-practice gap. Harvard Educational Review, 74, 273–306.

50.

Perkins

D. N.

, & Salomon

(1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16–25.

51.

Powell

, Francisco

, & Maher

(2003). An analytical model for studying the development of learners’ mathematical ideas and reasoning using videotape data. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22, 405–435.

52.

Putnam

R. T.

, & Borko

(2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.

53.

Randi

, & Corno

(2007). Theory into practice: A matter of transfer. Theory Into Practice, 46, 334–342.

54.

Rathgen

(2006). In the voice of teachers: The promise and challenge of participating in classroom-based research for teachers’ professional learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(5), 580–591.

55.

Rudd

(2007). Interactive whiteboards in the classroom. Bristol, England: Futurelab.

56.

Ruthven

(2001). Mathematics teaching, teacher education, and educational research: Developing “practical theorising” in initial teacher education. In Lin

F.-L.

, & Cooney

T. J.

(Eds.), Making sense of mathematics teacher education. (pp. 165–183). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.

57.

Ruthven

(2002). Linking researching with teaching: Towards synergy of scholarly and craft knowledge. In English

(Ed.), Handbook of International Research in Mathematics Education. (pp. 581–598). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

58.

Ruthven

, Hennessy

, & Brindley

(2004). Teacher representations of the successful use of computer-based tools and resources in teaching and learning secondary English, mathematics and science. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 259–275.

59.

Ruthven

, Laborde

, Leach

, & Tiberghien

(2009). Design tools in didactical research: Instrumenting the epistemological and cognitive aspects of the design of teaching sequences. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 329–342.

60.

Simons

, Kushner

, Jones

, & James

(2003). From evidence-based practice to practice-based evidence: the idea of situated generalisation. Research Papers in Education, 18, 347–364.

61.

Sorensen

P. D.

, Newton

L. R.

, & Harrison

(2006, September). The professional development of teachers through interaction with digital video. Paper presented at the annual conference of the British Educational Research Association (BERA), University of Warwick.

62.

Stenhouse

L. A.

(1975). The teacher as researcher. In Stenhouse

L. A.

(Ed.), An introduction to curriculum research and development. (pp. 142–165). London: Heinemann.

63.

Sutherland

, Armstrong

, Barnes

, Brawn

, Breeze

, Gall

(2004). Transforming teaching and learning: Embedding ICT into everyday classroom practices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 413–425.

64.

Säljö

(1995). Mental and physical artifacts in cognitive practices. In Reimann

, & Spada

(Eds.), Learning in humans and machines: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science. (pp. 83–96). Oxford, England: Pergamon.

65.

Triggs

, & John

(2004). From transaction to transformation: Information and communication technology, professional development and the formation of communities of practice. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 426–439.

66.

Wagner

(1997). The unavoidable intervention of educational research: A framework for reconsidering research-practitioner co-operation. Educational Researcher, 26(7), 13–22.

67.

Warwick

, Hennessy

, & Mercer

(2011). Promoting teaching and school development through co-enquiry: Developing interactive whiteboard use in a “dialogic classroom.” Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 17(3), 303–324.

68.

Warwick

, & Kershner

(2008). Primary teachers’ understanding of the interactive whiteboard as a tool for children's collaborative learning and knowledge-building. Learning, Media and Technology, 33(4), 269–287.

69.

Wegerif

(2007). Dialogic education and technology: Expanding the space of learning. New York: Springer.

70.

Wells

(1999). Dialogic inquiry: Toward a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

71.

Wiske

M. S.

(1995). A cultural perspective on school-university collaboration. In Perkins

D. N.

, Schwartz

J. L.

, West

M. M.

, & Wiske

M. S.

(Eds.), Software goes to school: Teaching for understanding with new technologies. (pp. 187–212). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.