Theme: principles of teaching dialogical and monological speech

The teaching forms of dialogical speech

Today knowledge of foreign languages is a particularly important in the process of getting education by young people as well as in training highly qualified personnel and specialists of foreign languages. Knowledge of languages, first of all, is characterized by correct and competent speech, theoretical ground of a foreign language and, of course, the ability of monologue and dialogical communication at a high level. The problem of teaching monologue and dialogical types of speech at all stages of learning English is one of the most important problems in the methodology of teaching English. The relevance of the study lies in a thorough study of the problems associated with teaching and implementing a monologue and dialogical utterance in a foreign language. Moreover, the theoretical substantiation of the work is also based on the psychological peculiarities for solving the cardinal tasks of teaching monologue and dialogical forms of expression. The purpose of this article is to form a communicative core and describe the fundamental skills of foreign language communication in both dialogical and monologic forms of communication, as well as to study the methodology of teaching monologue and dialogic speech in English, taking into account the characteristic features of monologue utterance and dialogue speech. The object of the research is the principles and features of teaching monologic and dialogical forms of expression, as well as difficulties and their overcoming in learning process.

Dialogical speech has the following characteristics:
1. Power Relationship: In a dialogic classroom, there is a democratic power relationship between participants and educator over the content and form of discourse. Students take on key responsibilities for managing turns of talk, offering new ideas, seeking clarification, evaluating one another’s ideas, and suggesting changes.
2. Space for Exploration: The trigger for dialogic learning is often questions that are “fundamentally open or divergent…in terms of allowing a broader degree of uncertainty in what would constitute an adequate answer”. The open-ended question is to trigger inquiry rather than to assess students or to have convergent answers sanctioned by the educator.
3. Epistemic Dialogue: Students who are engaged in dialogic learning are concerned about epistemic quality of ideas; they often offer elaborate and justified explanations for their thinking, support their ideas with examples, reasons, and evidence. They also consistently engage in 55000000 meta-level reflection by examining the process of the discussion and the epistemic criteria for reasoning, thus creating opportunities for self-correction. Examples of meta-level activities include seeking clarification, connecting ideas across contexts and participants, and reflecting on levels of understanding. Through the dialogic process, the students engage in collaborative co-construction of knowledge by building on one another’s positions and justifications, integrating the preceding contribution to advance the group’s reasoning.
4. Epistemic Feedback: Rather than providing answers to students or dichotomizing students’ answers as right or wrong, an educator advances the inquiry by paying attention to the process and quality of ideas, seeking elaboration for the epistemic basis of the answers, such as justification, asking for evidence, and challenging students with alternative perspectives The design of spaces is unpacked later in this section, but first we will consider what is meant by authentic problems, and the dialogical, collaborative construction of meaning through dialogue and interaction with multiple artefacts. Dialogic teaching is a pedagogical approach that capitalizes on the power of talk to further students' thinking, learning, and problem solving. The construct is often invoked when describing various pedagogies of classroom talk and is the focus of much research in the United Kingdom, the United States, Continental Europe, and elsewhere. Despite its appeal, or perhaps because of it, the idea of dialogic teaching has been variously interpreted to the point that its significance has become unclear. The purpose of this paper is to bring conceptual clarity to the construct. We outline how Robin Alexander (2004) used the term dialogic teaching in his model of dialogic pedagogy, and describe other, related conceptions of dialogic pedagogy. We then describe how the term dialogic teaching is used in contemporary scholarship. Finally, we address three major points of contention surrounding dialogic teaching: the issue of discourse form and function, the role of classroom culture, and whether dialogic teaching constitutes a general pedagogical approach or a specific discourse practice. Our overall intent is to examine similarities and differences among the various approaches to dialogic teaching and locate the concept within a network related ideas on teaching and learning through, for, and as dialogue. Dialogic teaching harnesses the power of talk to stimulate and extend pupils’ thinking and advance their learning and understanding. Dialogic teaching pays as much attention to the teacher’s talk as to the pupil’s. Dialogic teaching is grounded in research on the relationship between language, learning, thinking and understanding, and in observational evidence on what makes for good learning and teaching. Dialogic teaching is not a single set method of teaching. Dialogic teaching is an approach and a professional outlook rather than a specific method. It is concerned not only with the techniques we use but also the classroom relationships we foster, the balance of power between teacher and taught and the way we conceive knowledge.