ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2023
"What's Your Thinking behind That?" Exploring Why Biology Instructors Use Classroom Discourse.
Article in Journal of microbiology & biology education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Not simply "active": identifying types of active-learning tasks in introductory biology.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2026Article
- Development of the Follow-Up Discourse Observation Protocol (FUDOP) for Characterizing Instructor Active Learning Follow-Up Behaviors.CBE life sciences education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Instructor discourse, defined as verbal interactions with students in the classroom, can play an important role in student learning. Instructors who use dialogic discourse invite students to develop their own ideas, and both students and the instructor share ideas in back-and-forth exchanges. This type of discourse is well-suited to facilitate deep learning for students but is rare in undergraduate biology classrooms. Understanding the reasoning that underlies the use of dialogic discourse can inform teaching professional development for instructors who are learning to use discourse to support student learning. Through classroom video recordings to identify dialogic discourse and stimulated recall interviews to elicit instructor reasoning, we investigated why undergraduate biology instructors used dialogic discourse in active-learning lessons. Using inductive and deductive qualitative analysis of interview transcripts, we identified and characterized seven reasons that instructors used dialogic discourse, including three aligned with a theoretical framework of student cognitive engagement and four that emerged from our data set. In addition to aiming to prompt generative cognitive engagement in 34% of instances of dialogic discourse, instructors used dialogic discourse to prompt activity, supply information, provide feedback, decipher student thinking, leverage student thinking, and cue students to make connections. Reasoning varied across different types of dialogic discourse. These findings provide valuable insights that can inform research, teaching professional development, and individual instructors' reflections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.