Claims

Participating schools highly valued Dialogic Teaching, with teachers reporting positive effects on pupil engagement and confidence

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? The process evaluation found the approach highly valued, with teacher-reported positive effects on pupil engagement and confidence. → Jay et al. 2017

Evidence

Jay et al. 2017

Tim Jay, Ben Willis, Peter Thomas, Roberta Taylor, Nick Moore, Cathy Burnett, Guy Merchant, Anna Stevens. (2017). Dialogic Teaching: Evaluation report and executive summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581114

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Process evaluation based on surveys returned by 12 headteachers, 16 mentors, and 24 teachers, plus telephone interviews with six teachers, eight mentors, and three headteachers, and case-study visits to three intervention schools. Findings are self-reported perceptions, not tested attainment effects.

"The process evaluation showed that the Dialogic Teaching approach was highly valued by participating schools. Teachers reported positive effects on pupil engagement and confidence."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.