Ask Your Students for a Change: Using Student Produced and Selected Materials (SPSMs) in Dialogic Pedagogy

While I have found several good textbooks to use in my university classes over the years, the defining quality of my classes always seems to have been the creation and use of texts that students themselves have produced from their own experiences. In this piece, I will describe seven types of activity structure teachers can use to stimulate the production of student texts and then loop them back into the classroom for further student use. I will also describe four principal results of adopting such materials through this methodology—student-centered teaching, level and content sensitive materials, socialization, and emic pedagogy—and explain their impact on students in terms of SLA, identity construction, and community formation. 私が大学で教鞭をとってきた中で、良い教科書はいくつかあったが、授業の質に決定的な影響を与えたのは、学生自身が文章を書き、それを教材として使用することである。本論では、学生が自らの経験を綴ることを手助けし、それをさらなる学びの教材として授業で循環させる七つの手法を紹介する。それらは、学習者中心の教授法、学習者に適したレベルと内容の教材の使用、学生同士の交流、（学習者の周辺環境や文化を包括した）イーミックな教授法（emic pedagogy）の活用であり、その手法による、主な四つの効果と第二言語学習、アイデンティティ構築、そしてコミュニティの育成構築に与えるインパクトについても言及する。

Supervision, Advisement and Dialogic Pedagogy: present day issues and provocations for the future

This article is a reflection on the Dialogic Pedagogy Journal (DPJ) Special Issue on Supervision and Advisement. Altogether five articles made it through a rigorous double-blind peer review process and crossed the finishing line to become a part of this special issue. Supervision and advisement are areas of education where Dialogic Pedagogy approach is a welcome guest as learning and teaching constructs that are used in these areas require various forms of dialogue. This special issue is a humble but a promising beginning for the special issues on supervision and advisement in this journal. All the studies included in this special issue are good examples of well-done scientific endeavors that can be used as illustrations of how a good piece of research should be executed and reported. However, the question remains if the means of analyses used in these studies are satisfactory enough so that we could understand to the fullest the complexities of the co-lived lives of the participants in supervisory and advisement relationships and co-learned knowledge that all the participants have gained.

The relationship between education and learning and its consequences for dialogic pedagogy

Education is often viewed as formalized learning. I argue that the relationship between education and formalized learning is more complex and profound. In this conceptual essay, I examine the relationship between education and learning. Specifically, I discuss the cases when learning is not education and education is not learning. I argue that learning becomes educational when the person, the learner themselves, appreciates their learning. When learning is not appreciated by the learner, it does not constitute that person’s education. Thus, education is an ephemeral subjective construct, prone to appear and disappear as the person’s attitude to their learning changes. Also, education can be non-learning-based when it involves insights – abrupt, discontinuous changes of the person’s subjectivity – which are not caused by and rooted in the person’s experiences. Like learning, for an insight to be educational, it has to be perceived and appreciated by the person. I argue that human life consists of the flow of learning and insight. Noticing learning and insight by the person involves discontinuity of the person’s subjectivity, participation in activities, and other people that is recognized by others and the person. I discuss diverse forms of the person’s appreciation of learning and insights that constitute education. These forms vary from the behaviorist appreciation, as its lowest form, to the critical appreciation through critical dialogue as its highest form. Finally, I consider the consequences of defining education through a person’s appreciation of the transformation of their subjectivity for dialogic pedagogy.

Dialogic Pedagogy

Dialogic pedagogy is broadly concerned with dialogues in, around, and about teaching and learning. It differs radically from dialectic pedagogy in that the emphasis lies in the dialogue spaces in between learners (and teachers) rather than in hierarchical arrangements imposed by well-meaning authorities. Dialogic pedagogy takes its roots from a philosophical legacy originating in Socratic dialogues (and some would say even earlier in Menippeaic dialogues of ancient Greece). Various aspects of dialogic thought can be traced in the writings of Arendt, Bibler, Buber, Derrida, Gadamer, Habermas, Heidegger, Lévinas, Rorty, Spinoza, and Wittgenstein—to name a few. While dialogic pedagogy has a long history in philosophical thought and practice, and latterly in linguistics, it has only recently been granted legitimacy in formal education across the globe through the works of Dewey, Freire, Ranciere, Yakubinsky, and Bakhtin who have each, in their own ways, sought to bring dialogic philosophy to bear on pedagogical thought and practice. This annotated bibliography focuses primarily on writings that are mainly concerned with the interanimated ideas of Mikhail Bakhtin and members of his Russian network (in particular Malovich, Medvedev, and Voloshinov). Contemporary manifestations of dialogic pedagogy based on these origins are widely viewed as an antidote to authoritative regimes of control and accountability that now orient practice in many parts of the world. By its very premise dialogic pedagogy does not prescribe specific pedagogical approaches but, instead, provides a series of principles to orient practice that is attentive to the shaping nature of dialogues, the interanimating voices at play, and the implications of these for learning. Emphasis is placed on the event of dialogue as the form-shaping, orienting basis of pedagogy. It is not merely an exchange from one speaker to another, or a form of transmission of ideas, but rather a moral imperative to engage in joint meaning making on dialogic terms. In dialogic pedagogy, therefore, dialogue is learning and thus becomes a focus for investigation and practice.

Feminist Dialogic Pedagogical Spaces in Teacher Education: Practical Inclusivity, Eye-opening and Change

In this reflective article, I explore a feminist dialogic pedagogy of inclusive education (IE) in the sociocultural context of my and my students’ lived experience. I ask what a feminist dialogic pedagogy means to my students. The purpose of this article therefore is to advance knowledge about a feminist dialogic pedagogy in teacher education with a focus on the formation of students’ critical consciousness of IE philosophy that is currently mandated by all Canadian provinces. My intention is to contribute to an evolving scholarship of feminist pedagogy in teacher education programmes with a grounded and creative understanding of teacher candidates’ lived experience. The article argues that feminist dialogic pedagogy creates a space of inclusion for all students. Despite and across social differences, this pedagogy leads a conscious change among students, impacting their daily lives. Consequently, students successfully achieve their academic goals because they feel critically attentive to and conscious of their situated knowledge ( Haraway, 1988 , Feminist Studies, vol. 14, pp. 575–599) in educational institutions.