Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Secondary Students Use of Dialogical Discussion Practices to Foster Greater Interaction

  • Article
  • Published:
New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article describes the results of a study that investigated the effect of features of talk that appear to foster higher levels of interaction, within the scope of a larger study (Davies and Meissel in Br Educ Res J 42:342–365, 2016). Students were recruited from seven classrooms across three secondary schools of varying socioeconomic levels within the Auckland region in New Zealand, with four of the classrooms engaging in face-to-face and online discussion in small groups and the other three participating as whole classes. Results indicated a significant increase in the proportion of uptake questions used by students working in small groups for face-to-face group discussions. When placed in online groups (the same groups as the face-to-face groups), uptake questions increased. Classes who worked as a whole class online used significantly more elaborated explanations but, consequently, fewer interactions—less than half as many as the small groups. The results suggest that students using uptake questions fostered higher levels of interactions in both conditions.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adey, P., & Shayer, M. (2013). Piagetian approaches. In J. Hattie & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), International guide to student achievement (pp. 28–31). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., McNurlen, B., Archodidou, A., Kim, S., & Reznitskaya, A. (2001). The snowball phenomenon: Spread of ways of talking and ways of thinking across groups of children. Cognition and Instruction, 19, 1–46.

    Article  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(3), 685–730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, D., & Todd, F. (1978). Communication and learning in small groups. London, England: Routledge & Keegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. (1975). Class, codes and action. Vol. 3: Towards a theory of educational transmissions. London, England: Routledge & Keegan Paul.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cheong, C. M., & Cheung, W. S. (2008). Online discussion and critical thinking skills: A case study in a Singapore secondary school. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(5), 556–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R. C., & Waggoner, M. (2001). Patters of discourse in two kinds of literature discussions. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 378–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, H., Gay, G., Davidson, B., & Ingraffea, A. (2007). Social networks, communication styles, and learning performance in a CSCL community. Computers & Education, 49(2), 309–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, M. J., & Meissel, K. (2016). The use of quality talk to increase critical analytical speaking and writing of students in three secondary schools. British Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 342–365. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, M. J., & Sinclair, A. (2013). The effectiveness of on-line discussions for preparing students for a Paideia seminar. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 22(2), 173–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2013.773719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Seabury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, S. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. (2005). Electronic spaces as an alternative to traditional classroom discussion and writing in secondary English classrooms. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 9(3), 25–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matusov, E. (2009). Journey into dialogic pedagogy. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, S. (1993). Collaborative learning: More is not necessarily better. American Journal of Distance Education, 7(3), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzolini, M., & Maddison, S. (2007). When to jump in: The role of the instructor in online discussion forums. Computers & Education, 49(2), 193–213. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326950DP3502_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaren, P., Macrine, S., & Hill, D. (2010). Revolutionizing pedagogy: Educating for social justice within and beyond global neo-liberalism. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach. London, England: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Merleau-Ponty, M. (2005). In C. Smith (Ed.), Phenomenology of perception. London, England: Routledge.

  • Nystrand, M., Wu, L. L., Gamoran, A., Zeiser, S., & Long, D. (2003). Questions in time: Investigating the structure and dynamics of unfolding classroom discourse. Discourse Processes, 35(2), 135–198. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326950DP3502_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakeshott, M. (1962). The voice of poetry in the conversation of mankind, rationalism in politics and other essays. London, England: Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1962). Play, dreams, and imitation in childhood. New York, NY: Norton & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redmon, R., & Burger, M. (2004). Web CT discussion forums: Asynchronous group reflection of the student teaching experience. Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 6(2), 157–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A. P. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 77–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schrire, S. (2006). Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers and Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soter, A., Wilkinson, I. A. G., Murphy, P. K., Rudge, L., & Reninger, K. B. (2016). Analyzing the discourse of discussion: Coding manual (Technical report, unpublished manuscript). Department of Teaching and Learning, College of Education & Ecology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.

  • Steinberg, L. D. (2005). Adolescence (7th ed.). New York, NY: McCraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. (1978). In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Wegerif, R., Fujita, T., Doney, J., Linares, J. P., Andrews, R., & Van Rhyn, C. (2016). Developing and trialing a measure of group thinking. Learning and Instruction, 48(September), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/learninstruc.2016.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegerif, R., & Mercer, N. (1997). A dialogical framework for researching peer talk. In R. Wegerif & P. Scrimshaw (Eds.), Computers and talk in the primary classroom (pp. 49–65). UK, Multilingual Matters: Clevedon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. (1978). Talking with children: The complementary roles of parents and teachers. English in Education, 12, 15–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-8845.1978.tb00010.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. (2006). Monologic and dialogic discourses as mediators of education. Research in the Teaching of English, 41(2), 168–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maree J. Davies.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Davies, M.J., Meissel, K. Secondary Students Use of Dialogical Discussion Practices to Foster Greater Interaction. NZ J Educ Stud 53, 209–225 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-018-0119-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-018-0119-2

Keywords

Navigation