Skip to main content
Log in

Using dialogic talk to teach mathematics: the case of interactive groups

  • Original Article
  • Published:
ZDM Aims and scope Submit manuscript


This article explores the types of interactions that take place within “Interactive Groups” when individuals come to a meaningful understanding of mathematics. We discuss the possibility for dialogic talk to unveil the process of learning, and we explore the role that tutors may play in making this process happen. We postulate that learning-with-understanding may occur more likely in dialogic spaces where individuals use dialogic talk. We use a methodological tool to analyse interaction, drawing on video-recorded data. We conclude that dialogic talk may generate meaningful learning situations that may improve children’s mathematics learning. However, dialogic interaction may also prompt students to use claims that are not mathematically valid. The role of the adult to guide interaction within such situations needs to be further explored.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. Wood et al. (1986) distinguish between recruitment, reduction in degrees of freedom, direction maintenance, marking critical features, frustration control and demonstration, as steps of the scaffolding process.


  • Behr, M. J., Harel, G., Post, T., & Lesh, R. (1992). Rational number, ratio, and proportion. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 296–333). New York: Macmillan Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. (2012). What psychology should study. International Journal of Educational Psychology, 1(1), 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K. (1970). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D. (1993). But what do children really think? Discourse analysis and conceptual content in children’s talk. Cognition and Instruction, 11(3–4), 207–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elbers, E., & Streefland, L. (2000). Collaborative learning and the construction of common knowledge. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 15(4), 479–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elboj, C., & Niemelä, R. (2010). Sub-communities of mutual learners in the classroom: The case of interactive groups. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 15(2), 177–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flecha, R. (2000). Sharing words: Theory and practice of dialogic learning. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forman, E., & Larreamendy-Joerns, J. (1998). Making the implicit explicit: Classroom explanations and conversational implicatures. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5(2), 105–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia Carrión, R., & Díez-Palomar, J. (2015). Learning communities: Pathways for educational success and social transformation through Interactive Groups in Mathematics. European Educational Research Journal, 14(2), 151–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gómez, A., Elboj, C., & Capllonch, M. (2013). Beyond action research. The communicative methodology of research. International Review of Qualitative Research, 6(2), 183–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational Researcher, 26(1), 5–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Vol. 1. Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • INCLUD-ED Consortium. (2009). Actions for success in schools in Europe. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kieran, C. (2002). The mathematical discourse of 13-year-old partnered problem solving and its relation to the mathematics that emerges. In C. Kieran, E. Forman, & A. Sfard (Eds.), Learning discourse (pp. 187–228). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kieran, C., & Dreyfus, T. (1998). Collaborative versus individual problem solving: Entering another’s universe of thought. In A. Olivier & K. Newstead (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd PME (Vol. 3, pp. 112–119). Stellenbosch, South Africa.

  • Kieren, T. E. (1976). On the Mathematical, cognitive and instructional foundations of rational numbers. In R. A. Lesh & D. A. Bradbard (Eds.), Number and measurement. Papers from a research workshop (pp. 101–144). ERIC (ED 120 027).

  • Larson-Novillis, C. (1979). Locating proper fractions on number lines: Effects of length and equivalence. School Science and Mathematics, 53, 423–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobato, J., Clarke, D., & Ellis, A. B. (2005). Initiating and eliciting in teaching: A reformulation of telling. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36(2), 101–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, N., & Howe, C. (2012). Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), 12–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, N., & Sams, C. (2006). Teaching children how to use language to solve maths problems. Language and Education, 20(6), 507–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mertens, D., & Sordé, T. (2014). Mixed methods research with groups at risk: New developments and key debates. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 8(3), 207–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B., Turkanis, C. G., & Bartlett, L. (2001). Learning together: Children and adults in a school community. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sfard, A. (2002). There is more to discourse than meets the ears: Looking at thinking as communicating to learn more about mathematical learning. In C. Kieran, E. Forman, & A. Sfard (Eds.), Learning discourse (pp. 13–57). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soler, M., & Flecha, R. (2010). Desde los actos de habla de Austin a los actos comunicativos. Perspectivas desde Searle, Habermas y CREA. Signos, 43(2), 363–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valls, R., & Kyriakides, L. (2013). The power of Interactive Groups: How diversity of adults volunteering in classroom groups can promote inclusion and success for children of vulnerable minority ethnic populations. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(1), 17–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1986). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zack, V., & Graves, B. (2001). Making mathematical meaning through dialogue: “Once you think of it, the Z minus three seems pretty weird”. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 46(1–3), 229–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Javier Díez-Palomar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Díez-Palomar, J., Olivé, J.C. Using dialogic talk to teach mathematics: the case of interactive groups. ZDM Mathematics Education 47, 1299–1312 (2015).

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: