• Piyawan Rungwarapong Department of Languages, Prince of Songkla University Trang Campus
Keywords: dialogic talks, EFL classes, interactions, learning environment, Thai students


The study sought to empirically discover the factors that affect Thai students’ decisions to engage in dialogic interactions with peers and lecturers. Clean verbatim transcripts of in-depth interviews of 12 Thai EFL students from three universities in Thailand were analyzed. Findings reveal the primary determinants regarding Thai students’ engagement in dialogic talks with their classmates and lecturers. This study thus yields practical implications for EFL lecturers who adopt dialogic education as a pedagogical approach and for the university administrators who support these lecturers and the implementation of this approach.


Download data is not yet available.


Alesandrini, K., & Larson, L. (2002). Teachers bridge to constructivism. The Clearing House, 75:118-122.

Alexander, R. J. (2004). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. Cambridge: Dialogos.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Translated by Vern W. McGee. Austin, Tx: University of Texas Press

Buranapatana, M. (2006). Enhancing critical thinking of undergraduate Thai students through dialogic inquiry. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia. Retrieved January 14, 2017, from https://docuri.com/download/enhancingcritical-thinking-of-undergraduate-thaistudents-through-dialogic-inquiry_59bb856cf581719a3172a819_pdf

Cazden, C.B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, (2nd Ed.), NH: Heinemann.

Callahan, J. L. (2004). Effects of different seating arrangements in higher education computer lab classrooms on student learning, teaching style, and
classroom appraisal. Gainesville, Fla.:University of Florida.

Cooper, P. A. (1993). Paradigm Shifts in Designed Instruction: From Behaviorism to Cognitivism to Constructivism. Educational technology, 33(5), 12-19.

Gerlach, J. M. (1994). “Is this collaboration?” In Bosworth, K. and Hamilton, S. J.(Eds.), Collaborative learning: Underlying processes and effective techniques,
new directions for teaching and learning,No. 59.

Harvey, E. J., & Kenyon, M. C. (2013). Classroom seating considerations for 21st century students and faculty.Journal of Learning Spaces, 2(1).
Retrieved June, 22, 2017 from: https://libjournal.uncg.edu/index.php/jls/article/view/57888

Haneda, M. (2010). Learning science through dialogic inquiry: Is it beneficial for English-as-additional-language students? International Journal of Educational
Research, 49, 10-21.

Jacobs, G. & Farrell, T. (2001). Paradigm Shift: Understanding and implementing change in second language education. TESL-EJ 5/1. Retrieved July, 5, 2017 from: http://www-writing.berkeley.edu/TESL-EJ

Johnston, P.H. (2004). Choice words: How our language affects children’s learning.York, ME: Stenhouse.

Johnston, P.H., Ivey, G., & Faulkner, A. (2011). Talking in class: Remembering what is important about classroom talk.

The Reading Teacher, 65 (4):232–237. Jones, D. (2007). Speaking, listening, planning and assessing: The teacher’s role in developing metacognitive awareness. Early Child Development and Care, 177(6-7), 569-579.

Mujtaba, B. (2008). Task and Relationship Orientation of Thai and American Business Students Based on Cultural Contexts. Research in Higher Education
Journal, 1(1):38-57

Persons, L.S. (2008). The anatomy of Thai face. Journal of Humanities, 11, 53-75.

Piaget, J. (1972). The principles of genetic epistemology. New York: Viking.

Promyod, N. (2013). Investigating the shifts in Thai teachers’ views of learning and pedagogical practices while adopting an argument-based inquiry approach. In N. Promyod (Ed.), Investigating the Shifts in Thai Teachers' Views of Learning and Pedagogical Practices While Adopting an Argument-Based Inquiry Approach, 5-9. Iowa Research Online.

Rands, M.L. & Gansemer-Topf, A.M. (2017). The room Itself is active: How classroom design impacts student engagement. Journal of Learning Spaces, 6(1): 26-33.

Rungwaraphong, P. (2012). The promotion of student autonomy in Thailand tertiary education: lecturers’ perspectives and practices. A thesis submitted to the Victoria University of Wellington in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education Victoria University of

Rungwaraphong, P. (2014). Promoting student autonomy through dialogic learning. Journal of Education, Prince of Songkla University Pattani Campus,
25(1): 9-18.

Rungwaraphong, P. (2017). The implementtation of a poster conference activity in Thailand’s EFL classes: English and dialogic teaching implications for
practice. Journal of Liberal Arts,17(2), 85-101

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wegerif, R. (2013). Dialogic: Education for the Internet Age. London: Routledge

Zhang, J. & Stahl, K. A. D. (2011). Collaborative reasoning: Language-rich discussions for English learners. Reading Teacher, 65(4), 257-260. DOI: 10.1002/TRTR.01040
How to Cite
Rungwarapong, P. (2019). FACTORS AFFECTING THAI STUDENTS’ PARTICIPATION IN DIALOGIC TALKS IN EFL CLASSES: STUDENTS’ PERSPECTIVES. Social Science Asia, 5(1), 12-21. Retrieved from https://socialscienceasia.nrct.go.th/index.php/SSAsia/article/view/146
Research Article