Abstract
Proponents of dialogic teaching argue for changes to classroom interaction to promote student language use and higher-order thinking. An under-researched aspect of dialogic approaches is the way students initiate and manage disagreement during their talk with each other. This article examines interaction in whole-class talk during a literacy lesson in a Grade 5/6 classroom, focusing on the ways students disagreed with each other during discussion of a controversial topic and visual text. Conversation analysis delineates methods used by students to disagree with the perspectives of some students and align with others, and to diffuse disputes that sometimes arose out of disagreements. Methods discerned in the analysis include quoting previous talk of a student and formulating prior thoughts, aligning and dis-aligning with others using words and gestures, and use of laughter to respond to marked verbal and non-verbal displays of opposition. Discussion considers how students made use of interactional practices found in disagreements in ordinary conversations and in more formal argumentation, how their interpretive work informed the literacy lesson and interactions with each other in this multi-party setting, and how the teacher’s action research project promoted opportunities for students to try out more academic and institutional ways of engaging in disagreement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexander, R. (2010). Speaking but not listening. Accountable talk in an unaccountable context. Literacy, 44(3), 103–111.
Antaki, C., & Leudar, I. (2001). Recruiting the record: Using opponents’ exact words in parliamentary argumentation. Text, 21(4), 467–488.
Atkinson, M., & Heritage, J. (1999). Jefferson’s transcript notation. In A. Jaworski & N. Coupland (Eds.), The discourse reader, (pp. 158–166). London: Routledge.
Baker, C.D., & Freebody, P. (1993). The crediting of literate competence in classroom talk. Australian journal of Language and Literacy, 4, 279–294.
Barnes, D. (2008). Exploratory talk for learning. In N. Mercer & S. Hodgkinson (Eds.), Exploring talk in school (pp. 1–16). London; Thousand Oaks, CA: New Delhi; Singapore: SAGE.
Barnes, D. (2010). Why talk is important. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 9(2), 7–10.
Brown, A.C. (2016). Classroom community and discourse. How argumentation emerges during a Socratic Circle. Dialogic Pedagogy. An International Online Journal, 4, 81–97. doi:10.5195/dpj.2016.160.
Davidson, C. (2012). When ’yes’ turns to ’no’: Young children’s disputes during computer game playing at home. In S. Danby & M. Theobald (Eds.). Disputes in everyday life: The social and moral orders of children and young people (pp. 355–376). Bingley, UK: American Sociological Association & Emerald.
Edwards-Groves, C., & Davidson, C. (2017). Becoming a meaning maker: Talk and interaction in the dialogic classroom. Newtown: Primary English Teaching Association Australia.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Engle-wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Goodwin, M. (1990). He-said-she-said: Talk as social organization among Black children. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Goodwin, M.H. (1980). He-said-she-said. Formal cultural procedures for the construction of a gossip dispute activity. American Ethnologist, 7(4), 674–695.
Haddington, P. (2006). Identity and stance taking in news interviews: A case study. In I. Lassem, J. Strunck, & T. Vestergaard (Eds.), Mediating ideology in text and image: Ten critical studies (pp. 69–95). Philadelphia, PE: John Benjamins.
Hester, S., & Francis, D. (1997). Reality analysis in a classroom storytelling. British Journal of Sociology, 48(1), 96–112.
Hester, S., & Hester, S. (2010). Conversational actions and category relations: An analysis of a children’s argument. Discourse Studies, 12(1), 33–48.
Holt, E. (1996). Reporting on talk: The use of direct reported speech in conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 29(3), 219–245.
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The action research planner. Doing critical participatory action research. Singapore: Springer.
Maynard, D.W. (1985). On the functions of social conflict among children. American Sociological Review, 50(2), 207–223.
Maynard, D.W. (1986). Offering and soliciting collaboration in multi-party disputes among children (and other humans. Human Studies, 9(2-3), 261–265.
McHoul, A.W. (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society, 7, 183–212.
Mercer, N. (1996). The quality of talk in children’s collaborative activity in the classroom. Learning and Instruction, 6(4), 359–377.
Mercer, N. (2009). Developing argumentation: Lessons learned in the primary school. In N.M. Mirza & A.-N. Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices (pp. 177–194). Dordrecht: Springer.
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(4), 283–297.
Mondada, L. (2012). Embodied and spatial resources for turn-taking in institutional multi-party interactions: Participatory democracy debates. Journal of Pragmatics, 46, 39–68.
Newman, R. (2016). Working talk: Developing a framework for the teaching of collaborative talk. Research Papers in Education, 31(1), 107–131.
O’Connor, C., & Michaels, S. (2007). When is dialogue ’dialogic’? Human Development, 50, 275–285. doi:10.1159/000106415.
Osbourne, J., Simons, S., Christodoulou, A., & Howell-Richardson, C. (2013). Learning to argue: A study of four schools and their attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common institutional practice and its impact on students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 315–347. doi:10.1002/tea.21073.
Pomerantz, A. (2000). Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimating claims. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33(4), 347–373.
Reznitskaya, A., & Glina, M. (2013). Comparing student experiences with story discussions in dialogic versus traditional settings. The Journal of Educational Research, 106, 49–63. doi:10.1080/00220671.2012.658458.
Reznitskaya, A., Glina, M., Carolan, B., Michaud, O., Rogers, J., & Sequeira, L. (2012). Examining transfer effects from dialogic discussions to new tasks and contexts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 288–306. doi:10.1016/j. cedpsych.2012.02.003.
Reznitskaya, A., & Gregory, M. (2013). Student thought and classroom language: Examining the mechanisms of change in dialogic teaching. Educational Psychologist, 48(2), 114–133.
Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures on conversation/Harvey Sacks; Edited by Gail Jefferson; with an introduction by Emanuel A. Schegloff Oxford: Blackwell.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, SO, 696–735.
Schegloff, E.A. (1992). On talk and its institutional occasions. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings, (pp. 101–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, E.A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361–382.
Schegloff, E.A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8, 289–327.
Skidmore, D. (2000). From pedagogical dialogue to dialog-ical pedagogy. Language and Education, 14(4), 283–296. doi: 10.1080/09500780008666794.
Sohmer, R., Michaels, S., O’Connor, M.C., & Resnick, L.B. (2009). Guided construction of knowledge in the classroom: Teacher, talk, task, and tools. In B. Schwarz, T. Dreyfus, & R. Hershkowitz (Eds.), Transformation of knowledge through classroom interaction (pp. 105–129). London, UK: Routledge.
Teo, P. (2013). ’Stretch your answers’: Opening the dialogic space in teaching and learning. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2, 91–101. doi.org/10.1016/j. lcsi.2013.02.002.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Davidson, C., Edwards-Groves, C. ‘But you said this...’: Students’ management of disagreement within a dialogic approach to literacy instruction. AJLL 41, 190–200 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03652019
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03652019