- Propelling conversations by posing and responding to questions (SL.9–12.1c) that relate the
discussion to broader themes; actively incorporating others into the discussion (SL.9–10.1c);
ensuring a hearing for a full range of positions; and promoting divergent and creative
perspectives (SL.11–12.1c) - Responding thoughtfully to diverse perspectives (SL.9–12.1d); summarizing points of agreement
and disagreement; making new connections in light of evidence and reasoning presented
(SL.9–10.1d); synthesizing comments, claims, and evidence on all sides of an issue; resolving
contradictions; determining what additional information or research is required to deepen the
investigation or complete the task (SL.11–12.1d) - Integrating multiple sources of information presented in diverse media or formats; evaluating
the credibility and accuracy of each source (SL.9–12.2); and noting any discrepancies among
the data (SL.11–12.2) - Evaluating a speaker’s point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric (SL.9–12.3);
identifying fallacious reasoning or exaggerated or distorted evidence (SL.9–10.3); and assessing
the stance, premises, links among ideas, word choice, points of emphasis, and tone used
(SL.11–12.3)
The CA ELD Standards amplify this focus on discussion and collaborative conversations—about
content and about language—throughout both Parts I and II. In grades nine through twelve, ELs
are expected to interact in meaningful ways by sustaining discussions on a variety of age and grade-
appropriate academic topics (ELD.PI.9–12.1); collaborating
with peers in a variety of extended written exchanges
and grade-appropriate writing projects (ELD.PI.9–12.2);
negotiating with and persuading others using appropriate
registers (ELD.PI.9–12.3); and adapting language choices
according to the task, context, purpose, and audience (ELD.
PI.9–12.4).
Rich and engaged classroom discussion is well-supported
by research (Reznitskaya, and others 2001; Applebee,
and others 2003; Murphy, and others 2009; Lawrence and
Snow 2011), but it remains rare in classrooms. Traditional
classroom discourse patterns, such as I-R-E/F (teacher initiation-student response-teacher evaluation/
feedback) (Mehan 1979; Cazden 2001), limit student contributions to correct or expected answers and
also limit the number of students who participate. Student-led, small-group discussions increase the
amount of student participation but do not always result in the deep discussions that teachers expect
(Adler and Rougle 2005). Dialogic instruction or discourse is promoted as an approach that deepens
students’ thinking, builds on ideas expressed, and explores multiple perspectives (Nystrand 1997;
Langer 1995/2010). Figure 7.9 provides an overview of dialogic instruction.
The CA ELD Standards amplify
this focus on discussion and
collaborative conversations—
about content and about
language—throughout both
Parts I and II.Grades 9 to 12 Chapter 7 | 691