Talk Moves¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 2 claims (2 for) · 6 studies (2 causal, 2 quant-synthesis, 1 review, 1 associational), q2–q4 · 1 of 6 report an effect size

Description¶

Talk moves are sentence frames and conversational routines supplied to learners that help them express ideas and interact with one another in respectful, academically appropriate ways. From kindergarten through college, learners benefit from explicit instruction in skills such as summarizing another person's argument before presenting an alternate view, asking clarifying questions, and expressing agreement or partial agreement with a peer's stance. Talk moves can be incorporated into any discussion format, including Class Discussion, Collaborative Learning, and Argumentation.

Design Implications¶

Talk moves operationalize "accountable talk" — classroom discourse that is accountable to the learning community, to accepted standards of reasoning, and to knowledge Michaels, O'Connor, & Resnick's deliberative discourse framework. [+M]. Structured academic talk improves reasoning quality because learners must externalize and justify thinking, which supports elaboration and self-monitoring Self-explanation improves conceptual understanding. [+S]. The frames function as Scaffolding: they should be modeled by the instructor, practiced repeatedly, and gradually faded as learners internalize the discourse norms Fading support promotes transfer of responsibility. [+M].

Context¶

Requirements¶

• A small set of sentence frames or talk moves (e.g., "I agree with ___ because…", "Can you say more about…?", "I see it differently because…"), a discussion topic, and clear instructions
• Instructor modeling of each move, ideally with think-aloud demonstration of when and why to use it
• Repeated, low-stakes practice opportunities with feedback on the quality of talk, not just its content
• Norms that make it safe to disagree — talk moves only improve reasoning when disagreement is treated as intellectual work rather than social risk

Constraints¶

• Frames used mechanically, without genuine engagement with peers' ideas, produce the form of productive talk without the substance [-M] — accountability to reasoning, not to sentence templates, drives the effect
• Over-reliance on scripts can feel artificial and suppress authentic voice, particularly for older or more verbally confident learners [~W]
• Without instructor modeling and practice, learners rarely adopt the moves spontaneously [-M]
• Gains depend on discussion quality norms being maintained; in large or low-trust groups, moves may be ignored or used perfunctorily [~W]

Implementation Variability¶

• Teacher-directed talk moves (the instructor uses revoicing, prompting, and pressing for reasoning to steer whole-class discussion) versus student-directed frames (peers use the moves with each other in small groups)
• Domain-specific variants: math talk ("Do you agree or disagree, and why?"), science argumentation ("What is your evidence?"), literature seminars ("What in the text supports that?")
• Posters, desk cards, or digital chat prompts as persistent visual supports; sentence frames embedded in discussion protocols such as Socratic seminar or Debate

Target Learners¶

• All ages, K–20; particularly valuable for multilingual learners and students unfamiliar with academic discourse conventions, for whom frames make implicit norms explicit [+M]
• Learners who benefit from externalizing reasoning — talk moves channel self-explanation productively Self-explanation improves conceptual understanding. [+S]
• Less necessary for learners already fluent in academic argument, who may find frames constraining [~W]

Target Learning Goals¶

• Reasoning and argumentation: constructing, critiquing, and revising claims with evidence
• Perspective-taking and active listening: restating and engaging with others' ideas before responding
• Communication skills: building fluency with academic registers and respectful disagreement
• Classroom culture: establishing norms of collaborative intellectual work

Instructions¶

1. Select 3–5 talk moves matched to the discussion goal (e.g., revoicing, adding on, reasoning, clarifying question, respectful disagreement) rather than introducing a long list at once.
2. Model each move aloud in authentic use, and contrast it with a weak version (e.g., "You're wrong" vs. "I see it differently because…") — a Non-Examples approach sharpens discrimination.
3. Post the frames visibly and rehearse them in pairs or small groups with a low-stakes prompt before high-stakes discussion.
4. Launch the discussion using Peer Discussion or Class Discussion, with the instructor coaching moves in the moment (Coaching).
5. Debrief the talk itself — which moves helped the group reason better — and fade the frames as learners internalize the norms Fading support promotes transfer of responsibility. [+M].

Related Strategies¶

• Active Listening — talk moves presuppose and train genuine listening to peers' contributions
• Sentence Frames — the broader family of language supports of which talk moves are a discussion-specific instance
• Scaffold mathematical discussion with paraphrasing, restating, formulaic expressions, elaborating questions, and key vocabulary in context

Related Elements¶

• Argumentation — talk moves give learners the linguistic tools to enact argumentation norms
• Articulation — expressing reasoning aloud is the core cognitive act talk moves scaffold
• Class Discussion — the primary setting where teacher-directed talk moves operate
• Coaching — in-the-moment prompting of moves during discussion

Patterns That Use This Element¶

• Discussion-Based Learning — talk moves supply the discourse structure that makes discussion productive rather than merely participatory
• Collaborative Learning — frames govern how group members respond to and build on each other's ideas
• Cognitive Apprenticeship — the articulation and reflection methods, enacted socially through structured talk

Examples¶

• Accountable Talk® (University of Pittsburgh, Institute for Learning) — a research-based set of talk moves and norms (revoicing, pressing for reasoning, challenging with evidence) used across K–12 districts: https://ifl.pitt.edu
• Classroom Discussions in Math (Chapin, O'Connor, & Anderson) — a published professional-development curriculum teaching five talk moves (revoice, repeat, agree/disagree with reason, add on, wait time) for elementary mathematics discourse
• Talk Science Project (TERC) — sentence frames and facilitation moves for productive science talk in elementary classrooms: https://inquiryproject.terc.edu

Key Sources¶

• Michaels, S., O'Connor, C., & Resnick, L. B. (2008). Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: Accountable talk in the classroom and in civic life. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27(4), 283–297. doi:10.1007/s11217-007-9071-1
• Chapin, S. H., O'Connor, C., & Anderson, N. C. (2003). Classroom discussions: Using math talk to help students learn. Math Solutions Publications.
• Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: How we use language to think together. Routledge.
• Resnick, L. B., Michaels, S., & O'Connor, C. (2010). How (well-structured) talk builds the mind. In R. Sternberg & D. Preiss (Eds.), Innovations in educational psychology: Perspectives on learning, teaching, and human development (pp. 163–194). Springer.
• Alexander, R. (2018). Developing dialogic teaching: Genesis, process, trial. Research Papers in Education, 33(5), 561–581. doi:10.1080/02671522.2018.1481140