Dialogue journal
Dialogue journals are a teacher-developed practice, first researched in the 1980s in an ethnographic study of a sixth grade American classroom with native English speakers,[6] supported by a grant to the Center for Applied Linguistics from the National Institute of Education (NIE), Teaching & Learning Division.
[6] The teacher, Leslee Reed, wrote daily throughout the school year with each of her students in a dialogue journal (a small notebook) to promote personalized, ongoing, supportive communication.
[11] Research on dialogue journal use at all age levels—with native speakers of the language of the writing, first and second language learners, deaf students, and teachers—has identified key features of dialogue journal communication that set it apart from most writing in educational settings: authentic communication, collaborative learning and knowledge building, critical thinking, personal voice, critical pedagogy, reciprocal discourse, zone of proximal development, literacy as an interactive process, relationship building, and counseling.
These studies focus on the role of interactional dialogues in expanding students' awareness of and engagement with books and authors, with the goal of taking readers deeper into written texts.
[51] Atwell points out that dialogue journal interactions create the zone of proximal development,[30][31] in which "mediated learning" can occur, as an expert reader cooperates with a less experienced one to construct meaning from a text.
Werderich's analysis provides evidence for reading as a dynamic thinking event, in which the teacher's feedback, modeling of interpretative responses, and reflective questions facilitate the development of student comprehension of texts.
Research shows that the act of writing deepens understanding of a topic or area of thought, improves the ability to process and express ideas, and can result in increased critical thinking.
(Emphasis added)Prain and Hand[78] describe the need for students to be able to "choose and define problems; develop and test multimodal inquiry methods; examine findings; build, critique, and review theories and models; and make a persuasive case for claims" (p. 432) in their writing.
[16] Research has shown that the act of writing itself deepens understanding of a topic or area of thought, improves the ability to process and express ideas, and fosters higher cognitive functions.
Dialogue journal writing can be described as a place for risk-free experimentation with written language, as an opportunity for developing critical literacy and a reflective perspective on a topic of focus.
The students could ask questions about everything from Mrs. Reed's age to the structure of an atom, worry over problems with school friends or content, and complain when things didn't go as they thought they should.
[89]As we analyzed the writing done throughout the year, we found that the students who were more advanced and motivated were able to break out of some of the constraints of teacher-directed classroom work and explore the limits of their English proficiency, with the teacher's entries serving as a model and guide.
They found that in the writing, both writers "acted as proficient users of English – in spite of Ali's emergent spelling, vocabulary, syntax, and penmanship – because the dialogue journal created a 'setting for thought',[96] in which both participants reciprocally shared common knowledge, purposes, and tools of communication, evidently understanding and appreciating them" (p. 114).
Alexander[98] (2001) studied the dialogue journal writing that she did with grade 6, 7, and 8 students learning English (ages 11–15) in her classes in a suburban U.S. middle school outside Chicago, Illinois.
She found a number of benefits of the writing: The journals provided an excellent way for the students to practice grammar, spelling, punctuation, and handwriting in a real, communicative context.
[48] Chiesa, Damerow, and Bailey[49] describe six features of pedagogical scaffolding that might be used in dialogue journal writing in university courses—continuity and coherence, supportive environment, intersubjectivity, flow, contingency, and the handover/takeover principle.
Moulton and Holmes[94] looked at ways that dialogue journal writing can provide a bridge for international students learning English in a college or university course that spans the chasm between cultures.
Dialogue journals have become an accepted practice at all levels of deaf education since 1982, when the Linguistics Research Laboratory, directed by Dr. William Stokoe, created the Gallaudet Dialogue Journal Research Project and brought Dr. Jana Staton to introduce the practice to teachers and instructors at Kendall Demonstration Elementary School (KDES), Model Secondary School for the Deaf Archived 2014-10-05 at the Wayback Machine, and Gallaudet University.
In the 1980s, before the Internet and widespread email and texting made interactive, written communication accessible, profoundly deaf students were largely shut out of functional, meaningful, personally directed writing in school settings.
All of the students were in an optimal, language-rich print environment at Kendall Demonstration Elementary School, but the dialogue journal use appears to have engaged them in written English use more effectively than did other classroom assignments.
At the time of the first dialogue journal use at Gallaudet University (1982–1984) and at the National Technical Institute for the Deaf (NTID) (1980–1990), many students entered post-secondary education with very rudimentary written language competence in English[8] and often were not proficient in ASL.
[118] Even in a brief time period (10 weeks), Albertini and Meath-Lang[119] observed a marked growth in the use of pragmatic language functions needed for communication in social contexts, beyond simple description.
One study with younger deaf students (9–12 years old) found a modest increase in syntactic correctness and word usage over 24 weeks,[121] but again, there was no comparison group receiving the same classroom instruction.
Meath-Lang[128] pointed out that the interactive conversations create a truly student-centered language program, in which students have a voice in reconceiving and directing the curriculum itself and develop real control over their communication.
One of the many values of dialogue journals is the opportunity for teachers to provide informal counseling in a non-threatening, private context for individual students on their challenges and problems, whether about instructional or personal concerns.
[43][3] The training led her to use the private written conversations to model the pragmatic, problem-solving perspective of Reality Therapy and to encourage students to think through issues and problems with her guidance.
[137] Using a single-subject baseline and intervention design, Anderson, Nelson, Richardson, Webb, and Young[41] explored the value of dialogue journals in developing a more supportive student-teacher relationship with emotionally and behaviorally challenged middle school students.
Armstrong[139] studied the importance of teachers learning to use a wide variety of language functions to create shared mutuality and engage gifted students in written communication.
Countries using and publishing about dialogue journal writing include Canada,[154] Hong Kong,[48][49] Hungary,[155] Indonesia,[156] Iran,[60][66][157][158][159] Japan,[160] Jordan,[161] Korea,[93][162] Malaysia,[163][164][73] Saudi Arabia,[165] South Africa,[99][32] Taiwan,[69][166] and Turkey.
Connecting with them and being able to understand their concerns and feelings definitely led to a better EFL learning atmosphere.” [165] Research and ethnographic observations have stressed the value of dialogue journals for increasing student engagement and motivation in the classroom.
