Original Article Pakistan Journal of Society, Education and Language (PJSEL)

222

DIALOGICAL EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM IN PAKISTAN: ISSUES AND PROSPECTS

Syed Kamran Ali Shah1, Muqaddas Butt2, Irum Muzammil3, Mahroza Zafar Ali4

Original Article

1. PhD (Education) Scholar, Division of Education, University of Education, Lahore, Pakistan Email: [email protected] (Corresponding Author)

2. Assistant Professor, Division of Education, University of Education, Lahore, Pakistan.

3. PhD (Education) Scholar, Division of Education, University of Education, Lahore, Pakistan

4. MPhil (Education) Scholar, Division of Education, University of Education, Lahore, Pakistan

Abstract In Pakistan, a center-periphery approach is followed in the process of curriculum development in which the curriculum developers stress following the guidelines and objectives formulated by the bureaucrats at the central/ provincial levels. In this way, the teachers play a little role in the process of curriculum development instead they are instructed to teach the books and complete the syllabus. Dialogical education allows to provides a positive and dynamic contribution to students in the building of collective knowledge. Here a form of dialogue is adopted and students get an opportunity to discuss and build shared knowledge. This study aims to explore dimensions of dialogical education and to investigate key issues in implementing dialogical education in the country. It recommends that the problems of society like poverty, law and order situation, illiteracy, impatience, and unstable democracy can be better understood if a system of dialogical education is followed.

Keywords: Dialogical education, Curriculum development, Dynamic contribution, Poverty, impatience.

Several educationists, scholars, and philosophers like Mead, Bakhtin, Vygotsky, and INTRODUCTION Freire have contributed to the concept of Dialogical education provides an dialogical education. Modern dialogical opportunity for students to actively participate in approaches involve the themes like philosophy a dialogue and to create new knowledge based for children, thinking together, and accountable on their ideas (Alexander, 2006). This type of talk. education is not limited to classrooms. It is This study explores different dimensions neither related to a specific issue nor a particular of dialogical education and then discusses branch of knowledge. It is just a simple issues and prospects of implementing dialogical discussion that provides the participants a education in Pakistan. The term dialogical platform to listen to the ideas of one another and education is being used in many educational to develop shared knowledge (Bakhtin, 1988). settings, however; clarification of this concept is

PJSEL Vol 7 (2) July 2021: ISSN 2521-8123 (Print) 2523-1227 (Online)

Original Article Pakistan Journal of Society, Education and Language (PJSEL)

223 still needed. This article states the meaning, (Bakhtin, 1988). This education stresses to history, and modern development of dialogical provide constructive and active participation of education. Later on, some approaches to students and results in the construction of dialogical education have also been discussed. shared knowledge. The dialogic education After stating the key concepts of dialogical adopts the form of a dialogue and provides education, issues related to curriculum space to the students to discuss and build development in Pakistan are being illustrated. shared knowledge. Finally, the prospects of implementing dialogical Dialogical education is deep-rooted education in Pakistan are being highlighted and before the establishment of public education a few suggestions have been provided to systems and literacy through modern schools. support and implement the dialogical education Its roots can be traced to Buddhism in India in Pakistan. (Sen, 2005). The dialogic education is also The study aimed to explore the claimed to be rooted in Jewish education meaning, history, and modern development of (Schwarz & Baker, 2016), Confucian education dialogical education. Identification of issues (Li & Wegerif, 2014), and Islamic education involved in implementing dialogical education in (Makdisi, 1990). So it is deduced that the Pakistan was also a research objective. concept of dialogical education is not purely Following were the research questions. western although many of the latest concepts about dialogical education have been developed 1. What is the meaning, history, and modern in Europe and the USA. In the following development of dialogical education? paragraphs, the modern development of 2. What are the different approaches to dialogical education and the contribution of dialogical education? various scholars and educationists has been discussed. 3. What are the issues and prospects involved in implementing dialogical education and The work of in the field of curriculum in Pakistan? education showed the influence of different forms of dialogic education. In his last book, he gave inspiration for transitive discussion, which is the alternative form of dialogue that is the core Dialogical Education: Meaning, History and of dialogical education (Berkowitz, 1980). Modern Development George Herbert Mead wrote about how Dialogical education is a type of the students learn to reason. It included that the education that focuses upon the significance of individual is responsible for his thoughts by the dialogue for learning. It is very necessary to standards of good reasoning within a understand the meaning of dialogue and its community. This concept is partially influenced usage in an educational setting. Commonly a by the idea of Accountable Talk used in dialogue is such a conversation in which if an dialogical education (Resnick, Michaels, & answer does not create a new question, it is O’Connor, 2010). dropped from the dialogue (Bakhtin, 1986). In dialogic education, the students remained to Bakhtin differentiated between the inside engage in such a dialogue that ultimately helps and outside space of the dialogues. He them to form up new knowledge which is based characterized the essential dialogical education upon their ideas (Alexander, 2006). Dialogic by making the difference between an education is neither limited to classrooms nor it authoritative word and a persuasive word. The is confined to studies, but it is a general authoritative word has no internal impact upon discussion on any topic or any area of life the mind of the learners as it has not the ability

PJSEL Vol 7 (2) July 2021: ISSN 2521-8123 (Print) 2523-1227 (Online)

Original Article Pakistan Journal of Society, Education and Language (PJSEL)

224 to enter into the minds. On the other hand, the Philosophy for children persuasive word has the power to enter into Professor Matthew Lipman (2003) is someone's mind and may become an essential known to be the developer of Philosophy for part of the thinking of the learners. He thought Children (P4C). It promotes the idea of Bakhtin that the authoritative words stop critical thinking about dialogue. The major strategy adopted here among the students and so do not have a is based on children and is facilitated by the deeper impact on their minds. While the teacher. Teacher provides his theoretical persuasive words allow them to learn on their suggestion to students and invites them own and provide the opportunity for a deep discusses about it. Creative, critical, caring, and understanding of different concepts. Hence they collaborative thinking skills are included in P4C become able to understand the world from a courses in the United Kingdom (Sutcliffe, 2016). different perspective (Bakhtin, 1981).

Vygotsky put forward the idea of  Listening to others and valuing their cognitive development. This idea encouraged opinions is included in Caring. the dialogical understanding of thinking and  Replying and helping others is meant indicated the process of students learning to for being Collaborative. think. His concept of the zone of proximal  Critical means to ask about a certain development gave a clear idea about the phenomenon, finding its reasons and dialogical relations in the classroom. According finally making judgements. to this concept, the teachers are to connect with  Creative means to provide unusual the views of the students, and similarly, the rationalization about certain facts. students are to connect, too (Wegerif, 2011). Thinking Together

Paulo Freire was a great supporter of It is based on the views of Vygotsky and dialogical education. He argued that traditional promotes dialogue in the explicit shape of education stops critical thinking as it deals with Exploratory Talk. Here the participants share knowledge as a material thing that is to be their thoughts and views. They all then think injected into the minds of the learners. This collectively to build new awareness and education propagates ideas of certain people to knowledge (Mercer & Littleton, 2007). whom he named oppressors. These oppressors inculcate the knowledge of their benefit into the The wilfulness of all participants to minds of the oppressed people so that they can follow some basic behavior pattern plays a vital rule over them. Such education does not allow role in the generation of the Exploratory Talk. the oppressed to speak and express their ideas. This pattern may include values or norms, which He believed that this is the dialogical education may be termed as ground rules and can be that helps the oppressors to share their ideas. developed with the consent of the students They get the ability to think critically and to (Edwards & Mercer, 2013). Such rules are analyze the real-life problems and the hidden mentioned below: interests of the oppressor class of people.  Information be mentioned openly According to him, dialogical education focuses  Encouragement to every member to upon the personal experience of the learners, participate allows them to speak freely, and develops a Listening to others carefully relationship of respect and honor between the  teacher and the learner (Freire 2000). Now  Equal importance to every suggestion some dialogical education has been mentioned  Logical reasoning be provided by the in the following paragraphs. member for ideas and opinions  Acceptance of constructive challenges

PJSEL Vol 7 (2) July 2021: ISSN 2521-8123 (Print) 2523-1227 (Online)

Original Article Pakistan Journal of Society, Education and Language (PJSEL)

225

 Discussion about all possibilities before remain passive and keep on listening to what a a decision is taken teacher says. It involves the role of a teacher as  Teamwork with the focus on reaching a researcher, a political activist, and an artist an agreement (Shor and Freire, 1987).  The responsibility for decisions made According to Alexander (2010) dialogical lays on the group (Dawes, Mercer & teaching/ curriculum involve the following; Wegerif, 2004.) Accountable Talk  It provides the opportunity for learning and development to students It is similar to the concept of Thinking  It involves the process of inter-personal Together. This approach having three learning. dimensions: Accountability to the knowledge  It may be teacher-facilitated within the society, Accountability to precise information, classroom and self-directed outside the and Accountability to exact judgment was initially classroom. formulated in the USA (Resnick, O’Connor &  It enhances inquiry skills among Michaels, 2008). students. Accountability to the knowledge society  It appreciates the active involvement of is regarding the discussion of students with each all students in the teaching-learning other in which they learn from their class fellows process. and may agree or disagree with one other.  It improves the questioning skills of Accountability to precise information refers to the students. material which the students undertake during  It allows teachers to observe student their discussion. They should be able to make self-learning. claims and try to be as precise as possible. So, The dialogical curriculum involves the this is all about obtaining the accuracy of the following principles: facts as much as possible. Accountability to exact judgment is concerned with the  Different people have different development of a rational and consistent line of understandings about things in different argument. Here the students are required to times and places. adopt solid logic, as well as support, to back up  New information is created when these their arguments. different perspectives are involved in a dialogue. Dialogical Teaching and Curriculum  Respecting differences in opinions Dialogical teaching increases pupils’ creates a learning environment. capability to talk to encourage their thinking and  The learners construct their meanings improve wisdom (Alexander, 2010). Dialogical which enhance their learning. teaching is not merely a different way of  Such dialogues improve critical thinking communication; it is a principled approach to among students. . (Sylvia Wolfe, 2008). In the dialogical Process of Curriculum Development in teaching process, social relations are Pakistan transformed in the class room and critical thinking about society is enhanced among the There was not any permanent students. It is a way to reproduce information curriculum development institution by 1972 and and it provides the opportunity of learning to this activity of curriculum development was both, the teacher and the learner. It rejects the accomplished through committees. In 1972, the traditional way of teaching in which the students National Bureau of Curriculum in Islamabad

PJSEL Vol 7 (2) July 2021: ISSN 2521-8123 (Print) 2523-1227 (Online)

Original Article Pakistan Journal of Society, Education and Language (PJSEL)

226 along with four parallel Bureaus of Curriculum different levels. They possess a strong grip and Extension Wings at the provincial level was upon content and have the observation of the established, to revise the school curriculum learning experiences of students. There is no (Memon, 1989). alternative to teacher involvement in the process of curriculum development. The process of At present, curriculum developers focus curriculum development mainly depends upon to obtain the objectives formulated by the the involvement and professionalism of teachers bureaucrats at the central/ provincial levels. (Tanner & Tanner, 1980). This is a center-periphery approach. At the provincial level, different committees are formed Furthermore, the committees constituted which involve teachers, principals, subject for curriculum development have a major experts, and curriculum experts, who work on representation from college and university the proposals. These committees prepare an faculty members, and school teachers have a initial draft and after suitable changes, this draft very low proportion. No doubt, school teachers is presented to the national curriculum are directly involved with school students and committee. Sometimes, specific amendments the teaching-learning process and the are also done up to cope with the requirements responsibility of implementation of curriculum of different international donor agencies. In rests on their shoulders. But they are never simple words, one can say that the curriculum is given due presentation/ involvement in the dependent upon the views of the so-called process of curriculum development (Sheikh, experts or carries the recommendations 1970). suggested by funding organizations. The In the dialogical curriculum framework, teachers are not given any effective role in the both the teacher and the student play a vital role. process of curriculum development instead they Students learn critical thinking and apply it to are instructed to teach the books and complete understand society. They contribute to creating the syllabus, designed and issued by the new knowledge. Teacher act as a facilitator and authorities. Hence we may conclude that the involves and guides them towards a certain teachers, the students, and the parents have no specific field of knowledge. In Pakistan, this role in the formulation of curricula. approach is very difficult to adopt. The following Issues in implementing Dialogical Education issues are expected to arise in case of in Pakistan implementation;

In Pakistan, the process of curriculum Our curriculum developers and bureaucracy development is poor as we borrow the ideas would create hurdles and try to fail such a from western and developed countries and system in which their role and authority may include those into our curriculum without become less important. focusing on the prevailing ground realities of our  The educational policies of our country country. In this way, the policies are not are not favorable in this regard. implemented properly and these remained on  Politicians, economists, and other paper (Ghafoor 1979). Moreover, the stakeholders would never permit to involvement of bureaucracy in curriculum implement this approach. development causes severe issues regarding  Due to a lack of professionalism, a the content, methodology, and learning large number of teachers do not have experiences. Teachers may play a very active the required capability which is and efficient role in curriculum development. necessary for the implementation of They have the first-hand experience of teaching this approach. students and dealing with different classes of

PJSEL Vol 7 (2) July 2021: ISSN 2521-8123 (Print) 2523-1227 (Online)

Original Article Pakistan Journal of Society, Education and Language (PJSEL)

227

 Funding and donor agencies will react help them to become responsible and well upon it as it goes against their hidden aware youth. This youth will be able to meet the motives. challenges of a new era. All of these efforts will  Our society, as a whole, will not be result in a progressive and prosperous Pakistan. favoring it on account of its less rate of literacy and other social constraints. It is necessary to develop a strong  The status quo is a big hurdle as it professional base of the teachers before challenges every sort of change. implementing a dialogical curriculum framework  This approach will take a long time for in Pakistan. Teachers’ training is very significant its implementation and as a nation, we in this regard. Teacher education programs and lack patience, so this is a potential degrees should be equipped with an issue. introduction, skills required and execution of dialogical curriculum framework. The role of Prospects and Recommendations curriculum developers is also very important as Implementing a dialogical curriculum in they can provide necessary guidance to Pakistan has its significance. In the following teachers regarding the implementation of this paragraphs, we shall now discuss it. framework.

Dialogical teaching and curriculum create critical thinking among students. In the prevailing political and socioeconomic REFERENCES conditions, it becomes very significant to create critical thinking among students. This will help Alexander, R.J. (2017) Towards Dialogi them to understand the role of different powers Teaching: re-thinking classroom talk, (5th which serve as the foundation of our present edition), York, Dialogos. problems. These problems include poverty, law Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). Discourse in the novel, in and order situation, illiteracy, impatience, and M. M. Bakhtin (ed.), The dialogic unstable democracy. All of these problems are Imagination. Four essays by M. M. due to some hidden local and international Bakhtin. Austin: University of Texas powers. To resolve these, first, it is necessary to Press... understand the hidden motives of the forces, Berkowitz, M. W. (1980). The Role of Transactive which are responsible for their creation. Discussion in Moral Development: The Dialogical curriculum plays an important History of a Six-Year Program of Research, Part I [and]. ERIC Clearinghouse. role in the creation of new knowledge. This helps the students to improve their skills and Clarke, S. N., Resnick, L. B., Penstein Rosé, C., understanding of the present knowledge. In Corno, L., & Anderman, E. M. (2016). Pakistan, this will help a lot to increase the Dialogic instruction: a new frontier. Handbook of educational literacy rate and interest of students in their psychology. 3rd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, studies. 278-388. This curriculum changes the traditional Dawes, L. (2010). Creating a Speaking and role of teachers. The teachers have to adopt a Listening Classroom: Integrating Talk for student-oriented approach and keep the Learning at Key Stage 2. London: Routledge individual differences of students, into Dawes, L., Mercer, N. and Wegerif, R. (2004, consideration. In this way, the students may get Second Edition). 'Thinking Together': A a better opportunity for their growth and to programme of activities for developing enhance their capabilities. This will ultimately speaking, listening and thinking skills for

PJSEL Vol 7 (2) July 2021: ISSN 2521-8123 (Print) 2523-1227 (Online)

Original Article Pakistan Journal of Society, Education and Language (PJSEL)

228

children aged 8–11. Birmingham: curriculum. The Curriculum Journal, 17, Imaginative Minds Ltd. 1, 59-71. Lambirth, A. (2009). Ground rules for talk: the Edwards, D, and Mercer, N. (1987/2013) Common acceptable face of prescription. The Knowledge: The Development of Curriculum Journal, 20(4), 423-435. Understanding in the Classroom. London: Lefstein, A., & Snell, J. (2013). Better than best Methuen/Routledge. practice: Developing teaching and Gorard, S., Siddiqui, N., & See, B. H. (2017). learning through dialogue. Routledge. Can ‘Philosophy for children’ improve Li, L., and Wegerif, R. What does it mean to primary school attainment?. Journal of teach thinking in China? Challenging and Philosophy of Education, 51(1), 5-22. developing notions of ‘Confucian education’. Thinking skills and creativity Harré, R. (1999). Positioning theory. The 11 (2014): 22-32. International Encyclopedia of Language Ligorio, M. B. (2010). Dialogical relationship and Social Interaction. between identity and learning. Culture & Psychology, 16(1), 93-107. Hennessy, S., Mercer, N., & Warwick, P. (2011). Linell, P. (2009). Rethinking language, A Dialogic Inquiry Approach to Working mind and world dialogically: Interactional with Teachers in Developing Classroom and contextual theories of human sense- Dialogue. Teachers college making. Charlotte, NC: Information Age record, 113(9), 1906-1959. Publishing.

Howe, C. (2010). Peer groups and children’s Littleton, K., & Mercer, N. (2013). Interthinking: development. Oxford: Blackwell. Putting talk to work. Routledge. Kazak, S., Wegerif, R., & Fujita, T. (2015). Matusov, E. (2009). Journey into dialogic Combining scaffolding for content and pedagogy. Hauppauge, NY: Nova scaffolding for dialogue to support Publishers. conceptual breakthroughs in Matusov, E., & Miyazaki, K. (2014). understanding probability. ZDM, 47(7), Dialogue on . Dialogic 1269-1283. Pedagogy, 2. Matusov, E., & Wegerif, R. (2014). Kazak, S., Wegerif, R., & Fujita, T. (2015). The Dialogue on 'dialogic education': Has importance of dialogic processes to Rupert gone over to 'the dark side'? conceptual development in Dialogic Pedagogy: An International mathematics. Educational Studies in Online Journal, 2. Mathematics, 90(2), 105-120. Michaels, S., O’Connor, C., & Resnick, L. B. (2008). Deliberative discourse Kennedy, D. (2014). Neoteny, dialogic education idealized and realized: Accountable talk and an emergent psychoculture: Notes on in the classroom and in civic life. Studies theory and practice. Journal of Philosophy in philosophy and education, 27(4), 283- of Education, 48(1), 100-117. 297. Kumpulainen, K., & Rajala, A. (2017). Dialogic Oakeshott, M. (1989). The Voice of Liberal teaching and students’ discursive identity Learning: on negotiation in the learning of Education (T. Fuller, ed.). New Haven science. Learning and Instruction, 48, 23- and London: Yale University Press. 31. Phillipson, N., &Wegerif, R. (2016). Dialogic Education: Mastering Core Concepts Lambirth, A. (2006). Challenging the laws of talk: Through Thinking Together. Taylor & ground rules, social reproduction and the Francis. curriculum. The Curriculum Resnick, L. B., &Schantz, F. (2015). Journal, 17(1), 59-71. Re‐thinking Intelligence: schools that Lambirth, A. (2006). Challenging the laws of talk; build the mind. European Journal of ground rules, social reproduction and the Education, 50(3), 340-349. Resnick, L. B., Michaels, S., & O’Connor, C.

PJSEL Vol 7 (2) July 2021: ISSN 2521-8123 (Print) 2523-1227 (Online)

Original Article Pakistan Journal of Society, Education and Language (PJSEL)

229

(2010). How (well-structured) talk interplays between dialogical learning builds the mind. In R. J. Sternberg & D. and dialogical self. IAP – Information D. Preiss (Eds.) Innovations in Age Publishing (Book Series – educational psychology: Perspectives Advances in Cultural on learning, teaching and human Psychology, edited by JannValsiner development (pp. 163-194). New York: Wegerif, R. (2013). Dialogic: Education for Springer Publishing. the Internet age. Routledge. Resnick, L., O'Connor, C., and Michaels, S. (2007). Classroom Discourse, Wegerif, R., Doney, J. and Jamison, I (in Mathematical Rigor, and Student press) Exploring the ontological Reasoning: An Accountable Talk dimension of dialogic education through Literature Review. an evaluation of the impact of Internet Schwarz, B. B., & Baker, M. J. mediated dialogue across cultural (2016). Dialogue, argumentation and difference. Learning, Culture and Social education: History, theory and Interaction. practice. Cambridge University Press. Wegerif, R., Linares, J. P., Rojas- Drummond, S., Mercer, N., & Velez, M. (2005). Thinking Smith, M. K. (2002). and together in the UK and Mexico: Transfer informal education. The encyclopaedia of an educational innovation. Journal of of informal education. Classroom Interaction, 40-48. [www.infed.org/thinkers/et-freir.html] Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., & Dawes, L. (1999). Sutcliffe, R. (2016). The evolution of From social interaction to individual Philosophy for Children in the reasoning: an empirical investigation of a UK Philosophy for Children: possible socio-cultural model of cognitive Theories and Praxis in Teacher development. Learning and Education, 1. instruction, 9(6), 493-516. Topping, K. J., &Trickey, S. (2007). Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Collaborative philosophical enquiry for Towards a sociocultural practice and school children: Cognitive effects at theory of education. Cambridge: 10–12 years. British Journal of Cambridge University Press. Educational Psychology, 77(2), 271- Yang, Y. (2016). Lessons learnt from 288. contextualising a UK teaching thinking Voloshinov, V. N. (1986). Marxism and program in a conventional Chinese the Philosophy of Language. classroom. Thinking Skills and Harvard University Press. Creativity, 19, 198-209.

Webb, P., Whitlow, J. W., & Venter, D. (2016). From Exploratory Talk to Abstract Reasoning: a Case for Far Transfer?. Educational Psychology Review, 1-17. Wegerif, R. (2007). Dialogic, Education and Technology: Expanding the Space of Learning. New York and Berlin: Springer. Wegerif, R. (2011). Towards a dialogic theory of how children learn to think. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6(3), 179-190. Wegerif, R. (2012). Learning to think as becoming dialogue: an ontologic- dialogic account of learning and teaching thinking in primary classrooms. In Ligorio, B and Cesar, M. (Eds.) The

PJSEL Vol 7 (2) July 2021: ISSN 2521-8123 (Print) 2523-1227 (Online)