Analyzing Dialogicity in Online and Face-to-Face Settings: The Influence of Teaching Modality
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study examines the development of dialogicity in two distinct learning modalities—face-to-face and online—during a 10-session cultural literacy intervention involving 10th-grade high school students. Dialogicity refers to the quality of dialogue in terms of the degree to which student interactions promote sustained discussion and the co-construction of meanings. We analyzed and compared four sessions in each learning modality. The results indicated no significant differences in the overall frequency of dialogic moves between the two modalities. However, there were differences in the degree of dialogicity. High-dialogicity moves were significantly more frequent in the face-to-face classroom. Furthermore, metadialogue, a critical component for guiding and reflecting on discussions, was used more frequently in the face-to-face modality. Students employed it to guide discussions toward achieving the session objectives. In the online classroom, students encountered technical difficulties that disrupted the flow of dialogue, which made metadialogue even more important to overcome these problems. The findings suggest that future dialogic teaching interventions for online classrooms should be designed specifically for this modality. The design should include a scaffolding process for dialogicity — whereby students were progressively introduced to dialogic skills across sessions — to help students navigate these challenges and foster higher-quality discussions.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
- Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
- The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
- Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
- The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
- Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
- The Author represents and warrants that:
- the Work is the Author’s original work;
- the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
- the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
- the Work has not previously been published;
- the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
- the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
- The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.
References
Alexander, R. J. (2017). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (5th ed.). York, UK: Dialogos.
Baker, M. J. (2022). Epistemological questions for a psychology of dialogue. Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai-Philosophia, 67(3), 11-24. https://doi.org/10.24193/subbphil.2022.3.01
Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. University of Texas Press.
Bang-Larsen, A., & Qvortrup, A. (2022). Dialogic possibilities of online supervision. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal, 10, A33–A56. https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2022.443
Bender, T. (2012). Discussion-based Online Teaching to Enhance Student Learning. Theory, Practice and Assessment. Virginia: Sty-lus Publishing, LLC.
Bietti, L. M., Slakmon, B. Z., Baker, M. J., Détienne, F., Safin, S., & Schwarz, B. B. (2021). The DIALLS platform: Supporting cultural literacy and understanding of European values over the internet. In Maine, F., & Vrikki, M (Eds.), Intercultural dialogue in education: From theory to practice (pp. 87-102). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71778-0
Bouton, E., & Asterhan, C. S. (2023). In pursuit of a more unified method to measuring classroom dialogue: The dialogue elements to compound constructs approach. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 40, 100717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2023.100717
Briones, E., & Lara, L. (2016). Educación ética en la Universidad a través del diálogo multicultural online= Teaching Ethics in the University through Multicultural Online Dialogue. Comunicar: Revista Científica Iberoamericana de Comunicación y Educación= Scientific Journal of Media Education: 47, 2, 2016, 99-107. http://dx.doi.org/10.3916/C47-2016-10
CofE (Council of Europe) (2018). Reference framework of competences for democratic culture. Vol. 1: Context, concepts and model. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/prems-008318-gbr-2508-reference-framework-of-competences-vol-1-8573-co/16807bc66c
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
DIALLS (2018). Cultural Analysis Framework. Retrieved from www.dialls2020.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/D2.1-Cultural-Analysis-Framework.pdf
Dooly, M. (2011). Crossing the intercultural borders into 3rd space culture(s): implications for teacher education in the twenty-first century. Language and Intercultural Communication, 11(4), 319–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2011.599390
Dooly, M., & Tudini, V. (2022). ‘We should google that’: the dynamics of knowledge-in-interaction in an online student meeting. Classroom Discourse, 13(2), 188–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2021.2023596
Eklund, M., & Isotalus, P. (2024). Having it both ways: learning communication skills in face-to-face and online environments. In Frontiers in Education, 9:1270164. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1270164
Fabriz, S., Mendzheritskaya, J., & Stehle, S. (2021). Impact of synchronous and asynchronous settings of online teaching and learning in higher education on students’ learning experience during COVID-19. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 733554. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.733554
Farooq, S., & Benade, L. (2019). Constructing a Dialogic Pedagogy in Virtual Learning Environments: A Literature Review. New Zealand Journal of Teachers' Work, 16, 7-13. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1234501.pdf
Fisher, R. (2007). Dialogic teaching: developing thinking and metacognition through philosophical discussion. Early Child Development Care, 177(6–7), 615–631. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430701378985
Friedman, L. W., & Friedman, H. (2013). Using social media technologies to enhance online learning. Journal of Educators Online, 10(1), 1-22. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/114389/
García-Carrión, R., López de Aguileta, G., Padrós, M., & Ramis-Salas, M. (2020). Implications for social impact of dialogic teaching and learning. Front. Psychol., 11, 140. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00140
Garcia-Mila, M., Miralda-Banda, A., Luna, J., Remesal, A., Castells, N. & Gilabert, S. (2021). Change in classroom dialogicity to promote cultural literacy across educational levels. Sustainability, 13(11), 6410. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116410
Godwin-Jones, R. 2019. Telecollaboration as an approach to developing intercultural communication competence. Lang. Learn. Technol., 23(3), 8–28. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/44691
Goodrick, D. 2014. Comparative case studies. Methodological Briefs—Impact Evaluation No. 9. https://doi.org/10.1163/1571806054741137
Gutiérrez-Santiuste, E., & Ritacco-Real, M. 2023. Intercultural communicative competence in higher education through telecollaboration: Typology and development. Educ. Inf. Technol., 28(11), 13885-13912. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11751-3
Heron, M., Dippold, D., & Husain, A. 2021. How Dialogic Is the Online Space? A Focus on English Speaking Skills. TESL-EJ, 25(3), n3. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1331741
Hirsch, E. D. 1983. Cultural Literacy. The American Scholar, 52(2), 159–169. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41211231
Hofmann, R., Vrikki, M., & Evagorou, M. 2021. Engaging teachers in dialogic teaching as a way to promote cultural literacy learning: A Reflection on teacher professional development. Dialogue for Intercultural Understanding: Placing Cultural Literacy at the Heart of Learning, 135-148. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71778-0_10
Ishino, M., & Watanabe, A. 2025. Quick body torque toward blackboard at third position: Teachers’ material practice in classroom interaction. J. Pragmat., 238, 19-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2025.01.007
Johnson, M., & Mercer, N. (2019). Using sociocultural discourse analysis to analyse professional discourse. Learn. Cult. Soc. Interact., 21, 267-277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.04.003
Keynan, O., Brandel, N., & Slakmon, B. 2022. Students' knowledge on emotion expression and recognition in computer-mediated communication: A comparative case study. Comput. Educ., 189, 104597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104597
Kim, M. Y., & Wilkinson, I. A. 2019. What is dialogic teaching? Constructing, deconstructing, and reconstructing a pedagogy of classroom talk. Learn. Cult. Soc. Interact., 21, 70-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.02.003
Koester, A. 2022. Why face-to-face communication matters: A comparison of face-to-face and computer-mediated communication. In Rossette-Crake, F. & Buckwalter, E. (Eds.), COVID-19, communication and culture (pp. 115–134). Routledge.
Koh, J. H. L., & Daniel, B. K. (2022). Shifting online during COVID-19: A systematic review of teaching and learning strategies and their outcomes. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., 19(1), 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00361-7
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Lähdesmäki, T., Baranova, J., Ylönen, S. C., Koistinen, A. K., Mäkinen, K., Juškiene, V. & Zaleskiene, I. (2022). Learning cultural literacy through creative practices in schools: cultural and multimodal approaches to meaning-making. Singapore: Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89236-4
Lähdesmäki, T., Koistinen, A. K., & Ylönen, S. C. (2020). Intercultural dialogue in the European education policies: A conceptual approach. Springer Nature.
Li, L., & Wegerif, R. (2014). What does it mean to teach thinking in China? Challenging and developing notions of ‘Confucian education’. Think. Skills Creat., 11, 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2013.09.003
Lin, X., & Gao, L. (2020). Students’ sense of community and perspectives of taking synchronous and asynchronous online courses. AsianJDE, 15(1), 169-179. Retrieved from https://www.asianjde.com/ojs/index.php/AsianJDE/article/view/448
Littleton, K., & Mercer, N. (2013). Interthinking: Putting talk to work. Routledge.
Luna, J; Garcia-Mila, M., & Miralda-Banda, A. (2025). A Comparison of three Types of Tasks during an Intervention on Cultural Literacy and Dialogicity: Insights from Epistemic Network Analysis. Intercult. Educ. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2025.2469951
Macagno, F., Rapanta, C., Mayweg-Paus, E., & Garcia-Mila, M. (2022). Coding empathy in dialogue. J. Pragmat., 192, 116-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.02.011
Maine, F., Cook, V., & Lähdesmäki, T. (2019). Reconceptualizing cultural literacy as a dialogic practice. Lond. Rev. Educ., 17(3), 383-392. https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.17.3.12
Maine, F., & Vrikki, M. (2021). An introduction to dialogue for intercultural understanding: Placing cultural literacy at the heart of learning. In Maine, F., & Vrikki, M (Eds.), Intercultural dialogue in education: From theory to practice (pp. 1-14). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71778-0
Maine, F., Brummernhenrich, B., Chatzianastasi, M., Juškienė, V., Lähdesmäki, T., Luna, J., & Peck, J. (2021). Children's exploration of the concepts of home and belonging: Capturing views from five European countries. Int. J. Educ. Res., 110, 101876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2021.101876
Major, L., Warwick, P., Rasmussen, I., Ludvigsen, S., & Cook, V. (2018). Classroom dialogue and digital technologies: A scoping review. Educ. Inf. Technol., 23, 1995-2028. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9701-y
Makkonen-Craig, H. (2014). Aspects of dialogicity: Exploring dynamic interrelations in written discourse. Analysing text AND talk. FUMS Rapport, 233, 99–120. Retrieved from https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:757298/FULLTEXT02.pdf#page=101
Mansour, N. (2024). Students’ and facilitators’ experiences with synchronous and asynchronous online dialogic discussions and e-facilitation in understanding the Nature of Science. Educ. Inf. Technol., 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12473-w
Matusov, E. (2009). Journey into dialogic pedagogy. Nova Science Publishers.
Mercer, N., Wegerif, R., & Major, L. (Eds.). (2019). The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education. Routledge.
Meskill, C., & Anthony, N. (2018). Teaching online: A conversational approach. In Teaching children online: A conversation-based approach (pp. 1–14). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788922029-002
Murphy, L., Eduljee, N. B., & Croteau, K. (2020). College student transition to synchronous virtual classes during the COVID-19 pandemic in Northeastern United States. PEDRE, 5(4). https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/8485
Netz, H., & Lefstein, A. (2016). A cross-cultural analysis of disagreements in classroom discourse: Comparative case studies from England, the United States, and Israel. Intercult. Pragmat., 13(2), 211-255. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2016-0009
Oggel, G., Aibar, C. P., & Fildjokic, M. (2022). The Power of Virtual Exchange as an Overarching Tool to Unify Language, Culture, and Communication. Int. J. Comput.-Assist. Lang. Learn. Teach., 12(3), 1-21. http://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.307060
Pifarré, M., & Kleine Staarman, J. (2011). Wiki-supported collaborative learning in primary education: How a dialogic space is created for thinking together. Int. J. Comp.-Support. Collab. Learn., 6, 187-205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9116-x
Rapanta, C., & Trovão, S. (2021). Intercultural education for the twenty-first century: A comparative review of research. In Maine, F., & Vrikki, M (Eds.), Intercultural dialogue in education: From theory to practice (pp. 9-26). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71778-0
Rapanta, C., Miralda-Banda, A., Garcia-Mila, M., Vrikki, M., Macagno, F., & Evagorou, M. (2023). Detecting the factors affecting classroom dialogue quality. Linguist. Educ., 77, 101223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2023.101223
Reznitskaya, A., Glina, M., Carolan, B., Michaud, O., Rogers, J., & Sequeira, L. (2012). Examining transfer effects from dialogic discussions to new tasks and contexts. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 37(4), 288-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.02.003
Reznitskaya, A., & Wilkinson, I. A. (2017). The Most Reasonable Answer: Helping Students Build Better Arguments Together. Harvard Education Press. 8 Story Street First Floor, Cambridge, MA 02138.
Rizal, A., Nursalim, N., Ajam, A., Lestari, S. A. B., & Ridayani, R. (2024). Students’ Cultural Literacy Development through Dialogical Approach in Senior High School. KnE Social Sciences, 9(19), 273–287. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v9i19.16507
Rubingah, N., Ma’ruf, A. I. A., Prayitno, H. J., Fauzi, I. M., Sugara, G. S., & Kusumaningtyas, D. A. (2023). Cultural Literacy in Local Wisdom for Strengthening the Spirit of Mutual Cooperation. International Conference on Education for All, 1(2), 132–137. Retrieved from http://proceedings.alptkptm.org/index.php/iceduall/article/view/20
Schou-Juul, F., Jensen, S. S., & Schaffalitzky de Muckadell, C. (2024). Using dialogic teaching to promote student satisfaction and engagement in emergency remote teaching in primary school: a proof-of-concept study. Technol. Pedagag. Educ., 33(1), 87-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2023.2288005
Serafini, F. (2014). Exploring Wordless Picture Books. RT, 68(1), 24–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1294
Slakmon, B., & Schwarz, B. B. (2014). Disengaged students and dialogic learning: The role of CSCL affordances. Int. J. Comp.-Support. Collab. Learn., 9, 157-183. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11412-014-9191-x
Stewart, S. (2008). A study of instructional strategies that promote learning centered synchronous dialogue online [Doctoral dissertation, University of South Florida]. Scholar Commons. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/517
UN (2020). Policy Brief: Education during COVID-19 and beyond. United Nations. https://cutt.ly/bdHJEhX.
Wang, P., Yang, C., Tong, Y., & Chen, G. (2025). Discursive engagement for intersubjectivity: Investigating the verbal–visual relationship of productive classroom talk in synchronous online lessons. Learn. Cult. Soc. Interact., 51, 100892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2025.100892
Wegerif, R. (2017). Introduction. Education, technology and democracy: Can internet-mediated education prepare the ground for a future global democracy?. Civitas educationis, 6(1), 17-35.
Wegerif, R., Shi, S., Rubio-Jimenez, A., Long, Y., Liu, Q. & Chang, Chih. (2023). Dialogic Education: Tensions and dilemmas. In Tierney, J., Rizvi, F. & Erkican, K. (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education (4, pp. 600 – 611). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818630-5.14071-0
Xu, W., Chen, Y., & Yang, L. (2023). The dynamics of social performance and cognitive depth between students and teacher in online discussion forums with the SNA and LDA approach. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int., 62(1), 135–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2282155