In:Educating in Dialog: Constructing meaning and building knowledge with dialogic technology
Edited by Sebastian Feller and Ilker Yengin
[Dialogue Studies 24] 2014
► pp. 223–239
Teaching and learning as explorative action games. Guidelines for the design of dialogic educational technology
Published online: 14 November 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.24.11fel
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.24.11fel
In this paper, I develop a view of teaching and learning as explorative action
games (TaLEAG). The concept of the action game is borrowed from Weigand’s
(2010) Theory of Dialogic Action Games or Mixed Game Model (MGM). The
MGM rests on two basic assumptions: communication is dialogic and language
is action. These two assumptions are adapted to teaching and learning in general
and to what I call explorative action games in particular. The ensuing discussion
revolves around the question of how educational technology should be designed
in order to facilitate learning in the context of explorative action games.
The paper is structured as follows: Following the introduction, I will outline a
theory of teaching and learning that is derived from the main assumptions of
the MGM. The focus here is on the dyad of action and reaction in TaLEAG.
I will describe the main features of the initial speech act in the game, which I
call the explorative speech act, as well as of the discover speech act as reaction to
the explorative. In the second step, TaLEAG is connected to a view of learning
as conceptual change learning (CCL). In the final step, this will lead us to a set
of preliminary guidelines for the design of educational technology. The paper
then concludes with an outlook on the direction educational technology should
take in the near future.
References (18)
Alexander, R.J. 2006. Towards Dialogic Teaching: Rethinking Classroom Talk. 3rd edn. Thirsk: Dialogos.
Aristotle, and William Charlton. 1992. Physics. Books I and II (Clarendon Aristotle series). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Arnett, Ronald C. 1998. Dialogic Education: Conversation about Ideas and Between Persons. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Feller, Sebastian. 2013. “Conceptual Change in Language Teaching and Learning. Why and How Lexical Concepts Drive Meaning Construction Differently across Languages.” Theory and Practice in Language Studies 10 (3): 1726–1736.
Hargreaves, David J. 2012. “What do We Mean by Creativity and Creative Thinking?” In Young Children’s Creative Thinking, ed. by Hiroko Fumoto, 15–26. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Hewson, Peter W. 1992. “Conceptual Change in Science Teaching and Teacher Education.” Paper presented at a
Meeting on “Research and Curriculum Development in Science Teaching
.” Madrid, Spain.
National Institute of Education, Singapore. 2009. A Teacher Education Model for the 21st Century. Online at [URL]. (last date of access 6 March, 2012)
Pinkwart, Niels, and Bruce M. McLaren. 2012. Educational Technologies for Teaching Argumentation Skills. Sharjah, U.A.E: Bentham Science Publishers.
Precht, Richard D. 2013. Anna, die Schule und der liebe Gott: Der Verrat des Bildungssystems an unseren Kindern. 1st edn. München: Goldmann.
Ravenscroft, Andrew. 2012. “Highly Communicative e-Learning Communities: Developing a Socio-Cultural Framework for Cognitive Change.” In Education in Cyberspace, ed. by Sian Bayne, and Ray Land, 130–146. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Searle, John R. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. London: Cambridge University Press.
Trilling, Bernie, and Charles Fadel. 2009. 21st Century Skills: Learning for Life in Our Times. 1st edn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wegerif, Rupert. 2010. Mind Expanding: Teaching for Thinking and Creativity in Primary Education. Maidenhead, Berkshire: Open University Press.
Weigand, Edda. 2000. “The Dialogic Action Game.” In Dialogue Analysis VII. Working with Dialogue (Beiträge zur Dialogforschung 22), ed. by Malcolm Coulthard, Janet Cotterill, and Frances Rock, 1–18. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
. 2010. Dialogue: The Mixed Game (Dialogue studies 10). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
