Reason and Creativity in Classroom Dialogues

Abstract

The development of reason has long been an important aim for education. This is possibly reflected in the emphasis on the importance of explicit verbal reasoning in definitions of 'Exploratory Talk', a concept that has had some influence on classroom teaching. In this paper I argue from transcript evidence that, while Exploratory Talk is a specific dialogical model of reason that has proved to be a useful pedagogic tool, there are educationally valuable ways of talking together that are characterised more by verbal creativity than by explicit reasoning. Close analysis of actual dialogues highlights the essential importance of verbal creativity even to the task of solving reasoning test problems in small groups. This analysis also suggests that the extent and quality of creativity found in classroom dialogues is influenced by shared ground rules. This implies the need to expand our understanding of dialogical reason to incorporate creativity and to develop dialogical models to support the stimulation and channelling of creativity in educational contexts.

Explicit reasoning, creativity and co-construction in primary school children's collaborative activities

“…Constructing a summary after reading three related texts which differed in genre is a more evidently creative task and it is not obvious that explicit reasoning always supports creativity. Indeed, there are some suggestions from studies of classroom talk that in some cases it may hamper co-construction by preventing the expression of contributions that can not be explicitly justified (Wegerif, 2005). However, there is evidence that the ground rules of exploratory talk, other than explicit reasoning, support a dialogic 'space of reflection' in which multiple alternatives are expressed and selected (Wegerif, in press).…”

The importance of dialogic processes to conceptual development in mathematics

“…The notion of "dialogic" has been used by some scholars (e.g., Wells, 1999) to characterise a Vygotskian account of conceptual development, but we think that this use ignores an important difference between Vygotsky's understanding of social interaction and Bakhtin's understanding of dialogic (Matusov, 2009;Wegerif, 2005). Vygotsky's account of conceptual development does not distinguish clearly between social mediation by tools and relationships between voices.…”

Theoretical and pedagogical perspectives on orchestrating creativity and collaborative learning

“…Added to this, learners have to share enough common ground so that it is possible to form shared knowledge and to handle tensions of opposite and critical views fruitfully (see Brown & Campione, 1994). In other words, instead of reaching unanimity, the aim is to support critical discussion and evaluation of alternative views through careful guidance by the teacher (Dillenbourg & Jermann, 2007;Doise & Mugny, 1986;Kollar, Fischer, & Slotta, 2008;Lahti, Eteläpelto, & Siitari, 2004;Mercer & Littleton, 2007;Moran & John-Steiner, 2004;RojasDrummond, Mazon, Fernandez, & Wegerif, 2006;Wegerif, 2005). Moreover, creative collaboration requires an emotionally safe atmosphere and the provision of a respectful environment in which differences are critically engaged, but not in a disputational way (Eteläpelto & Lahti, 2008;.…”