Questioning in Bakhtinian dialogic pedagogy and argumentation theory

Main Article Content

Kiyotaka Miyazaki


This paper examines differences between Bakhtin’s dialogic view and argumentation theories with respect to questioning and analyzes the significance of these differences for the theories of pedagogy. In argumentation theories, a question is thought to be shared among the parties in a discussion. In the fields of argumentation and education, in particular science education, not only is a question shared, but also an answer is integrated into one among the participants (Schwarz and Baker 2017). Bakhtin’s view on questioning, advanced in his later writings, shows how new questions emerge continuously in answers to the previous questions so that a question is not shared by a questioner and an answerer. Using the Bakhtinian framework in the analysis of some Japanese pedagogical thoughts and classroom interactions, it is shown that each student can develop her/his own unique understanding of the topic – not the shared, integrated understanding – by finding out a new question in seemingly wrong answers, or by discovering different questions in the same problem. Finally, the reason why new questions emerge in question-and-answer exchange is investigated within a constructivist perspective from cognitive science.

Article Details

How to Cite
Miyazaki, K. (2023). Questioning in Bakhtinian dialogic pedagogy and argumentation theory. Dialogic Pedagogy: A Journal for Studies of Dialogic Education, 11(3), A42-A64.
Author Biography

Kiyotaka Miyazaki, Waseda University, Japan

Kiyotaka Miyazaki is a professor emeritus at the Faculty of Human Sciences, Waseda University, Japan. His research interest is examining the views of Japanese elementary and early childhood education teachers’ knowledge of practice and making them encounter Bakhtin’s view on dialogism to discover some universal principles of dialogic education.


Alexander, R. J. (2005). Towards Dialogic Teaching: Rethinking Classroom Talk. London:Dialogos.

Andriessen, J. & Baker, M.J. (2006). Arguing to learn. In R.K. Sawyer, (Ed.). The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Asterhan, C. S. C., Howe, C., Lefstein, A., Matusov, E., & Reznitskaya, A. (2020). Controversies and consensus in research on dialogic teaching and learning. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal, 8. 1–16. DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2020.312

Azegami, K.(1990). Kodomo no sikou no michisuji wo taisetsunishite: 3 nennsei rika ‘kamidama teppou’ no jissen.[Respecting children’s paths of thinking: 3rd grader’s science class on ‘bamboo gun’. ] Dai 33kai shakaika no shoshi wo tsuranuku kai zenkoku shuukai[Paper presented at 33rd national assembly of the research group for carrying out the social studies’ original aims.] Kyoto, Japan. August, 1990.

Baker, M. J., Andriessen, J. & Schwarz, B. B. (2019). Collaborative argumentation-based learning. In N. Mercer, R. Wegerif, & L. Major (Eds.). The Routledge International Handbook of Research on Dialogic Education (pp. 76–88). Abbington, Oxon: Routledge.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics (C. Emerson, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

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

Bang, M., Faber, L., Gurneau, J., Marin, A. & Soto, C. (2016). Community-based design research: Learning across generations and strategic transformations of institutional relations toward axiological innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity. 23(1), 28–41. DOI: 10.1080/10749039.2015.1087572

Barajas-López, F. & Bang, M. (2018). Toward indigenous making and sharing: Implications for mathematics learning. Annual Perspectives in Mathematics 2018: Rehumanizing Mathematics for Black, Indigenous, and Latinx Students, 13–22. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Berland, L. K. & Lee, V. R. (2012). In Pursuit of Consensus: Disagreement and legitimization during small-group argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 34(2), 1857–1882. DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2011.645086

Boyd, M. P. (2016). Connecting “man in the mirror”: Developing a classroom dialogic teaching and learning trajectory. Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 16(2), 1–26. DOI: 10.17239/L1ESLL-2016.16.02.03

Chin, C. & Osborne, J. (2008). Students’ questions: A potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1–39. DOI: 10.1080/03057260701828101

Clement, J. (1982). Students’ preconceptions in introductory mechanics. American Journal of physics, 50(1), 66–71. DOI: 10.1119/1.12989

Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Co.

diSessa, A. A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G. Forman & P.Pufall (Eds.), Constructivism in the Computer Age. New York, NY: Psychology Press.

diSessa, A. A. (2006). A history of conceptual change research. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 49–70). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

diSessa, A. A. (2008). A bird’s–eye–view of the “pieces” vs. “coherence” controversy.(From the “pieces” side of the fence) In S. Vosnidou (Ed.) International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change (pp. 35–60). New York, NY: Routledge.

Duschl, R.A. & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education argumentation. Discourse in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72. DOI: 10.1080/03057260208560187

van Eemeren, F. H., Garssen, B., Krabbe, E.C.W., Snoeck Henkemans, A. F., Verheji, B., & Wagemans, J. H. M. (2014). Handbook of Argumentaton Theory. Dordrecht: Springer.

van Eemeren, F. H., & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2017). Argumentation: Analysis and Evaluation. 2nd. ed. New York, NY: Routledge.

Felton, M. & Crowell, A. (2022). Argumentation as a collaborative enterprise: A study of dialogic purpose and dialectical relevance in novice and experienced arguers. Informal Logic, 42(1), 171–202.

Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Haneda, M., Teemant, A. & Sherman, B. (2017). Instructional coaching through dialogic interaction: Helping a teacher to become agentive in her practice. Language and Education, 31(1), 46–64. DOI: 10.1080/09500782.2016.1230127

Howe, C., Hennessy, S., Mercer, N. Vrikki, M. & Wheatleyl, V. (2019). Teacher-student dialogue during classroom teaching: Does it really impact upon student outcomes? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22, 465–512. DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2019.1573730

Inagaki, K. & Hatano, G. (2002). Young Children’s Naive Thinking about the Biological World. East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.

Itakura, K. (2019). Hyposthesis-Experiment-Class (Kasetu): With Practical Materials for Fun and Innovative Science Classes. Kyoto: Kyoto University Press.

McCloskey, M. (1983). Intuitive physics. Scientific American, 248, 120–130.

Medin, D. L. & Bang, M. (2014). Who’s Asking?: Native Science, Western Science, and Science Education. MA: MIT Press.

Miyazaki, K. (2019). Dialogic lessons and triadic relationship among pupils, learning topic, and teacher. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal, 7, 58–87. DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2019.239

Miyazaki, K. (2020). How dialogic teachers create the dialogic classroom: Lessons from Japanese teachers. In N. Mercer, R. Wegerif, & L. Major (Eds.). The Routledge International Handbook of Research on Dialogic Education (pp. 227–237). Abbington, Oxon: Routledge.

Morson, C. S., & Emerson, C. (1990). Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a Prosaics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Nagano elementary school attached to the Faculty of Education, Shinshu University (Ed.). (2010). Kokoro to Karada wo hiraite tomoni manabu Kodomo to Kyoushi [Children and the Teachers Who Learn Collaboratively with Their Bodies and Minds Being Open] (Report No. 54).

Omland, M., Ludvigsen, S. R. & Rødnes, K. A. (2022). The role of querying: Investigating subject-oriented meaning-making. Learning Culture and Social Interaction, 33(4), 100599. DOI: 10.1016/j.lcsi.2021.100599

Perelman, Ch. (1977). L’ empire rhétorique: Rhétorique et Argumentation. Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. VRIN.

Plantin, C. (2005). L’argumentation - Histoire, théories, perspectives. [Argumentation –History, Theories, Perspectives]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Rapanta, C. & Felton, M. K. (2022). Learning to argue through dialogue: A review of instructional approaches. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 477–509. DOI: 10.1007/s10648-021-09637-2

Resnick, L. B., Michaels, S. & O’Connor, M. C. (2010). How (well-structured) talk builds the mind. In D. D. Preiss & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Innovations in Educational Psychology: Perspectives on Learning, Teaching, and Human Development (pp. 163–194). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.

Rosebery, A., Ogonowski, M., DiSchino, M. & Warren, B. (2010). The coat traps all your body heat: Heterogeneity as fundamental to learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences,19(3), 322–357. DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2010.491752

Schwarz, B. B. & Baker, M. J. (2017). Dialogue, argumentation and education: History, theory and practice. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Smith, J. P. III, diSessa, A. A. & Roschelle, J. (1994). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115–163. DOI:10.1207/s15327809jls0302_1

Toulmin, S. (1958). The use of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Toyoda, H. (2007). Shudan shiko no jugyou zukuri to hatsumon ryoku: Riron hen (Jugyo-ryoku appu heno chosen vol. 12) [Making Lessons of Group Thinking and the Skill of Questioning: A Theory (The Challenge for Raising the Lesson Skills)]. Tokyo: Meiji Tosho.

Tsukamoto, Y. (2014). Kodomo wa kyoushi no “hatsumon” towa kotonaru “toi” wo motsu. [Children have different questions from “teacher posed question.”]. Chiba-Keisai-Daigaku-Tanki-Daigaku-bu Kiyo [ the Proceedings of Chiba Keizai College], 10, 25–37.

Vosniadou, S. (2007). The cognitive-situative divide and the problem of conceptual change. Educational Psychologist, 42(1), 55–66. DOI: 10.1080/00461520709336918

Walton, D. (2000). The place of dialogue theory in logic, computer science and communication. Synthese, 123(3), 327–346. DOI: 10.1023/A:1005237527730

Walton, D. (2006). Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.