{"id":1361,"date":"2020-04-23T13:53:27","date_gmt":"2020-04-23T12:53:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/21stcenturylearners.org.uk\/?p=1361"},"modified":"2020-06-07T23:14:52","modified_gmt":"2020-06-07T22:14:52","slug":"a-teachers-guide-to-dialogic-pedagogy-part-2-the-how-getting-started","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/21stcenturylearners.org.uk\/?p=1361","title":{"rendered":"A Teacher\u2019s Guide to Dialogic Pedagogy Part 2: The How \u2013 Getting Started"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

In the previous post<\/strong><\/a> I described dialogic pedagogy<\/strong> as involving teachers and students talking and thinking in a way that seeks out and values different perspectives, and uses them to develop understanding. The broad term \u2018dialogic pedagogy\u2019 encompasses diverse approaches to its enactment in the classroom. Notable approaches include Professor Robin Alexander\u2019s Dialogic Teaching<\/strong><\/a>; Thinking Together<\/strong><\/a> as developed by Professor Rupert Wegerif, Professor Neil Mercer and Dr Lyn Dawes; Professor Lauren Resnick\u2019s Accountable Talk; Roger Sutcliffe\u2019s Philosophical Teaching<\/strong><\/a> and Philosophy for Children<\/strong><\/a> (P4C) as developed by Professor Matthew Lipman. Follow the links or see the bibliography to find out more about them.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

My own classroom approach, outlined in this and subsequent posts, is in reality a synthesis of those listed above. I refer to it as Thinking Together<\/strong> as it has largely grown out of my writing with Rupert Wegerif in which we have re-visited the Thinking Together approach, though it is also connected closely to my experience with P4C. I am certainly indebted to all those listed, especially Wegerif, Sutlcliffe and Mercer who I am fortunate enough to have worked with. <\/p>\n\n\n\n


Types of Teacher Talk<\/h2>\n\n\n\n


One way to get started is to consider the different types of talk used in your classroom \/ school. This can involve both student talk and teacher talk, in small groups and as a whole-class. Let\u2019s focus first on teacher talk. From the outset I want to be clear that dialogue is not<\/strong> the only type of talk valuable to teaching and learning. I remember the fashionable saying that a teacher should be \u2018a guide on the side, not a sage on the stage\u2019. I don\u2019t agree. Teaching is a complex business and must make use of various ways of communicating; there is a place for \u2018telling\u2019 and there is a place for dialogue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Robin Alexander provides a more nuanced \u2018repertoire<\/strong>\u2019 of teacher talk types comprised of rote, recitation, instruction, exposition, discussion, deliberation, argumentation and dialogue (though he suggests that discussion, deliberation and argumentation can be a part of dialogue). Another helpful (and somewhat simpler) taxonomy is provided by Eduardo Mortimer <\/strong>and Philip Scott<\/strong> in their 2003 book \u2018Making Meaning in Secondary Science Classrooms\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


Like Alexander, Mortimer and Scott acknowledge that teachers \u2013 legitimately \u2013 use different talk-based approaches to develop ideas with their students. They refer to these as different \u2018communicative approaches<\/strong>\u2019, and offer four categories of communicative approach based on two dimensions. The first of these considers where the talk lies on a scale from dialogic to authoritative:<\/p>\n\n\n\n