Figure 5.2: Concept map of the dialogic teaching and learning model

For example, if the issues of discussion are always prescribed by the educators, the problems may not be seen as authentic to the learners. Similarly, if the lessons always conclude with the educators having the final say on the issues discussed, learners often just wait for the final verdict instead of putting forth their ideas, contributing to a negative sense of learner agency. As discussed in Chapter 3, if the educator is the one who answers student questions, this can effectively silence the contributions of learners. Whereas throwing questions back to the group to consider demands their attention and contributions. The educator’s beliefs about learning are critical to the success of using a dialogical approach. An acquisition (Sfard, 1998) model of learning where learners ‘acquire’ knowledge as a product, from the educator, positioning the educator as the source of knowledge, the authoritative voice will not enable the use of dialogic teaching. The dialogical teaching process implicitly understands learning as an iterative social process, involving access to multiple perspectives, and resources and empowering learners as authoritative voices. Perhaps the biggest concern for educators is the issue of power and the shift in roles of educator and students required, as discussed in Chapters 2 and 3. As educators, we can learn to become comfortable as one contributing voice, with a shift in power relations, sharing power with our learners. However, as we are ultimately responsible for the final assessment decisions, dialogical teaching requires a significant, though not equalising of power relations between educator and students.

Hong and Scardamalia (2014) have advised to use principle-based design for knowledge building lessons. What this means is for the educators to guide learners following the principles of knowledge building (see Table 4.1), rather than following prescribed procedures for instructions. This requires constant assessment of learners’ behaviours and their progress of inquiry, making decisions about how to steer them towards the productive path. Metaphorically, it is like a skilful driver who constantly judges the road and traffic conditions, gets information update from GPS, and decides which routes to take from Point A to Point B, rather than taking a predetermined route regardless of the situational conditions.

One approach an educator can take is, for each principle, develop a suite of instructional tactics that work under different situations. For example, using different strategies to elicit authentic problems from the learners (e.g., getting students to talk about their experience, using a video clip that depicts a situation in classroom, sharing an article that presents a controversy). Over time, the educator can build up a repertoire of strategies that he/she can flexibly use. Alternatively, the course can be designed around learners’ individual workplace problems as was the case in the WPL and Performance course.

Figure 5.2: Concept map of the dialogic teaching and learning model

Integrating the empirical findings of the two cases, Figure 5.2 summarises the model of dialogic teaching and learning. We started with Learning Design that aims at providing learning environments conducive to the learning processes aligned to dialogic teaching and learning with the ultimate goal of achieving the intended learning outcomes. The learning design is guided by the broad goal of Dialogic Teaching and Learning that empowers learners with voices and shared control to shape their learning trajectory in the course. Knowledge building principles can be consulted to provide more specific instructional tactics, and the learning spaces (physical and cyberspace) could provide the necessary support for these processes.

The dialogic learning process is one that focuses on authentic issues or problems related to the topics of the courses. Learners experience first-hand the dialogic learning process characterized with multiple voices from learners who display the agency to provide multiple perspectives to the issues being discussed. They contribute to the knowledge building, a collaborative inquiry effort that aims at improving ideas. It is a process pervasive through the course such that the learners experience multiple iterations in an upward spiral process leading to deepening their understanding of the topics.

The learning outcomes include the cognitive gain in terms of deepened understanding of the topics, at both the individual and the group level. In addition, there are opportunities for learners to engage in metacognition of their learning processes so as to regulate their learning behaviours to adapt to a approach they are relatively less familiar to. Some learners experience a changing identity as a learner, seeing themselves as active agents contributing to and shaping their own learning journey.