Can Peer Facilitation Promote Classroom Dialogue at Scale?
Roč.30,č.2(2025)
Facilitating Teacher Continuous Professional Development: How, Why and by Whom?
Teacher professional development (TPD) programs are essential for fostering continuous teacher learning. Facilitators play a central role in these programs, mediating discussions and supporting learning. However, most research has focused on programs led by external professionals; such programs are resource-intensive and difficult to scale. This study reports on a peer-facilitated model designed to promote dialogic teaching in primary mathematics that was implemented in three primary schools in Chile. Peer facilitators implemented a program featuring content-focused sessions and reflective teaching cycles. Perceptions of the facilitator role were explored; the facilitators' actions in professional development meetings were documented and analyzed to characterize the role in detail and discuss its viability and potential. Data included interviews with teachers, facilitators, and school leaders, alongside video recordings of TPD sessions from two schools that completed the program. Findings suggest the peer-facilitator role is viable and has potential for promoting learning under certain conditions. Participants reported positive perceptions of peer facilitation; viability was related to role ownership and decision-making flexibility. Furthermore, facilitators demonstrated a repertoire of actions aimed at guiding the group, fostering a supportive learning environment, and contributing as equals. Facilitators engaged in a variety of practices, with adaptive variations depending on the type of activity at hand. Individual differences and some challenges were identified. This study highlights the potential of peer facilitation in TPD to offer scalable, cost-effective alternatives to traditional expert-led models, emphasizing the importance of context and support mechanisms and noting emerging challenges. The possibilities and limitations of a facilitator who has close ties with participants but is not an expert on the TPD program are discussed in relation to literature on facilitating educational dialogue and scalability. Findings can inform future efforts to design sustainable TPD programs that balance structure with adaptability while promoting local ownership.
professional development; teacher; facilitator; scalability; classroom dialogue
[1] Agencia de Calidad de la Educación. (2017). Informe resultados educativos educación básica docentes y directivos 2016. https://archivos-web.agenciaeducacion.cl/resultados-simce/fileadmin/Repositorio/2016/Docentes_y_Directivos/basica/IRE_BASICA_2016_RBD-13163.pdf
[2] Alexander, R. (2020). A dialogic teaching companion. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351040143
[3] Alrø, H., & Skovsmose, O. (2002). Dialogue and learning in mathematics education: Intention, reflection, critique. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48016-6
[4] Amodia Bidakowska, A. (2020). Disciplinary dialogues: Examining the influence of subject on classroom dialogue, activity type and learning outcomes in English primary schools [Doctoral thesis, University of Cambridge]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.69281
[5] Babichenko, M., Lefstein, A., & Asterhan, C. S. C. (2024). Teacher collaborative inquiry into practice in school-based learning communities: The role of activity type. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 49, 100852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2024.100852 | DOI 10.1016/j.lcsi.2024.100852
[6] Berkel, C., Mauricio, A. M., Schoenfelder, E., & Sandler, I. N. (2011). Putting the pieces together: An integrated model of program implementation. Prevention Science, 12(1), 23–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-010-0186-1 | DOI 10.1007/s11121-010-0186-1
[7] Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033008003 | DOI 10.3102/0013189x033008003
[8] Borko, H., Koellner, K., & Jacobs, J. (2014). Examining novice teacher leaders’ facilitation of mathematics professional development. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 33, 149–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.11.003 | DOI 10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.11.003
[9] Borko, H., Carlson, J., Deutscher, R. Boles, K. L. Delaney, V., Fong, A., Jarry-Shore, M., Malamut, J., Million, S., Mozenter, S., & Villa, A. M. (2021). Learning to lead: an approach to mathematics teacher leader development. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 19(1), 121–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10157-2 | DOI 10.1007/s10763-021-10157-2
[10] Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa | DOI 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
[11] Brissenden, T. (1988). Talking about mathematics. Simon & Schuster Education.
[12] British Educational Research Association. (2018). Ethical Guidelines for educational research (4th Ed.). https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-foreducational-research-2018-online.
[13] Calcagni, E. (2020). Professional dialogues to foster dialogic pedagogy in mathematics: Design and test of a school-run teacher professional development programme [Doctoral thesis, University of Cambridge]. Apollo – University of Cambridge Repository https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.57193
[14] Calcagni, E., & Lago, L. (2018). The three domains for dialogue: A framework for analysing dialogic approaches to teaching and learning. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 18, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2018.03.001 | DOI 10.1016/j.lcsi.2018.03.001
[15] Calcagni, E., Ahmed, F., Trigo Clapés, A. L., Kershner, R., & Hennessy, S. (2023). Developing dialogic classroom practices through supporting professional agency: Teachers’ experiences of using the T-SEDA practitioner-led inquiry approach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 118, 104067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104067 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2023.104067
[16] Carney, M. B., Brendefur, J. L., Hughes, G., Thiede, K., Crawford, A. R., Jesse, D., & Smith, B. W. (2019). Scaling professional development for mathematics teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 80(3), 205–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.01.015 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2019.01.015
[17] Chapin, S. H., O’Connor, C., & Anderson, N. C. (2009). Classroom discussions: Using math talk to help students learn (2nd Ed.). Math Solutions.
[18] Coburn, C. E. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032006003 | DOI 10.3102/0013189x032006003
[19] Coles, A. (2012). Using video for professional development: The role of the discussion facilitator. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 16(3), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-012-9225-0 | DOI 10.1007/s10857-012-9225-0
[20] Desimone, L. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140 | DOI 10.3102/0013189x08331140
[21] Dobie, T. E., & Anderson, E. R. (2015). Interaction in teacher communities: Three forms teachers use to express contrasting ideas in video clubs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47(3), 230–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.01.003 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2015.01.003
[22] Grau, V., Calcagni, E., Preiss, D. D., & Ortiz, D. (2017). Teachers’ professional development through university–school partnerships: Theoretical standpoints and evidence from two pilot studies in Chile. Cambridge Journal of Education, 47(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2015.1102867 | DOI 10.1080/0305764x.2015.1102867
[23] Gómez Zaccarelli, F., Schindler, A. K., Borko, H., & Osborne, J. (2018). Learning from professional development: A case study of the challenges of enacting productive science discourse in the classroom. Professional Development in Education, 44(5), 721–737. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2017.1423368 | DOI 10.1080/19415257.2017.1423368
[24] Guzmán, V., & Larrain, A. (2021). The transformation of pedagogical practices into dialogic teaching: Towards a dialogic notion of teacher learning. Professional Development in Education, 50(4), 716–729. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2021.1902837 | DOI 10.1080/19415257.2021.1902837
[25] Haßler, B., Hennessy, S., & Hofmann, R. (2018). Sustaining and scaling pedagogic innovation in Sub-Saharan Africa: Grounded insights for teacher professional development. Journal of Learning for Development, 5(1), 58–78. https://jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d/article/view/264
[26] Hennessy, S. (2014). Bridging between research and practice: Supporting professional development through collaborative studies of classroom teaching with technology. Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-434-5
[27] Hennessy, S., & Davies, M. (2020). Teacher professional development to support classroom dialogue: Challenges and promises. In N. Mercer, R. Wegerif, & L. Major (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education (pp. 238–253). Routledge. | DOI 10.4324/9780429441677-21
[28] Hennessy, S., Haßler, B., Blair, J., Duggal, N., Leong, W. S., Makonga, A., & Tembo, A. (2014). OER4Schools: A professional learning programme for interactive teaching and learning with and without ICT. Facilitator version. University of Cambridge; Commonwealth Education Trust. https://oer.opendeved.net/wiki/OER4Schools
[29] Hennessy, S., Haßler, B., & Hofmann, R. (2016). Pedagogic change by Zambian primary school teachers participating in the OER4Schools professional development programme for one year. Research Papers in Education, 31(4), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2015.1073343 | DOI 10.1080/02671522.2015.1073343
[30] Hennessy, S., Kershner, R., Calcagni, E., & Ahmed, F. (2021). Supporting practitioner-led inquiry into classroom dialogue with a research-informed professional learning resource: A design-based approach. Review of Education, 9(1), e3269. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3269 | DOI 10.1002/rev3.3269
[31] Hofmann, R., & Ruthven, K. (2018). Operational, interpersonal, discussional and ideational dimensions of classroom norms for dialogic practice in school mathematics. British Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 496–514. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3444 | DOI 10.1002/berj.3444
[32] Howe, C., Hennessy, S., Mercer, N., Vrikki, M., & Wheatley, L. (2019). Teacher–student dialogue during classroom reaching: Does it really impact on student outcomes? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(4–5), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2019.1573730 | DOI 10.1080/10508406.2019.1573730
[33] Kaner, S. (1996). Facilitator’s guide to participatory decision-making. New Society Publishers.
[34] Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 945–980. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800 | DOI 10.3102/0034654315626800
[35] Khong, T. D. H., Saito, E., & Gillies, R. M. (2017). Key issues in productive classroom talk and interventions. Educational Review, 71(3), 334–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2017.1410105 | DOI 10.1080/00131911.2017.1410105
[36] Kiemer, K., Gröschner, A., Pehmer, A.-K., & Seidel, T. (2015). Effects of a classroom discourse intervention on teachers’ practice and students’ motivation to learn mathematics and science. Learning and Instruction, 35, 94–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.10.003 | DOI 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.10.003
[37] Kim, M.-Y., & Wilkinson, I. A. G. (2019). What is dialogic teaching? Constructing, deconstructing, and reconstructing a pedagogy of classroom talk. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 21, 70–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.02.003 | DOI 10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.02.003
[38] Law No. 20,903, which creates the Teacher Professional Development System and modifies other legal regulations (2016). https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=1087342
[39] Lefstein, A., & Snell, J. (2014). Better than best practice: Developing teaching and learning through dialogue. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315884516
[40] Lefstein, A., Louie, N., Segal, A., & Becher, A. (2019). Taking stock of research on teacher collaborative discourse: Theory and method in a nascent field. Teaching and Teacher Education, 88, 102954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102954 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2019.102954
[41] Lefstein, A., Vedder-Weiss, D., & Segal, A. (2020). Relocating research on teacher learning: Toward pedagogically productive talk. Educational Researcher, 49(5), 360–368. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20922998 | DOI 10.3102/0013189x20922998
[42] McIntyre, D. (2005). Bridging the gap between research and practice. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35(3), 357–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640500319065 | DOI 10.1080/03057640500319065
[43] Mercer, N. (2020). Language and the joint creation of knowledge. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429400759
[44] Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach. Routledge.
[45] Michaels, S., & O’Connor, C. (2015). Conceptualizing talk moves as tools: Professional development approaches for academically productive discussions. In L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence throughacademic talk and dialogue (pp. 347–362). American Educational Research Association. https://doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-43-1_27 | DOI 10.3102/978-0-935302-43-1_27
[46] Ministerio de Educación. (2012). Bases curriculares de Matemática [Mathematics curriculum]. Ministerio de Educación de Chile [Chilean Ministry of Education]. http://www.curriculumenlineamineduc.cl/605/w3-propertyvalue-53688.html
[47] O’Connor, C., Michaels, S., & Chapin, S. H. (2015). “Scaling Down” to explore the role of talk in learning: From district intervention to controlled classroom study. In L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 111–126). American Educational Research Association. https://doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-43-1_9 | DOI 10.3102/978-0-935302-43-1_9
[48] OECD. (2017). Education in Chile. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264284425-en
[49] OECD. (2019). TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and school leaders as lifelong learners. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en | DOI 10.1787/1d0bc92a-en
[50] Osborne, J., Simon, S., Christodoulou, A., Howell-Richardson, C., & Richardson, K. (2013). Learning to argue: A study of four schools and their attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common instructional practice and its impact on students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 315–347. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21073 | DOI 10.1002/tea.21073
[51] Pauli, C., & Reusser, K. (2015). Discursive cultures of learning in (everyday) mathematics teaching: A video-based study on mathematics teaching in German and Swiss classrooms. In L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 181–193). American Educational Research Association. https://doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-43-1_14 | DOI 10.3102/978-0-935302-43-1_14
[52] Pehmer, A.-K., Gröschner, A., & Seidel, T. (2015). How teacher professional development regarding classroom dialogue affects students’ higher-order learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.12.007 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2014.12.007
[53] Perry, E., & Bevins, S. (2018). Building capacity for professional development: The development of teachers as facilitators in Ghana. Professional Development in Education. 45(3), 390–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2018.1474489 | DOI 10.1080/19415257.2018.1474489
[54] Perry, E., & Boylan, M. (2018). Developing the developers: supporting and researching the learning of professional development facilitators. Professional Development in Education, 44(2), 254–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2017.1287767 | DOI 10.1080/19415257.2017.1287767
[55] Perry, E., & Booth, J. (2021). The practices of professional development facilitators. Professional Development in Education, 50(1), 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2021.1973073 | DOI 10.1080/19415257.2021.1973073
[56] Pöhler-Friedrich, B., Prediger, S., Schwarts, G., & Karsenty, R. (2024). Learning to leverage teachers’ ideas: facilitators’ growth in moderation practices with simultaneously strong goal focus and participant focus. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-024-09660-4 | DOI 10.1007/s10857-024-09660-4
[57] Prediger, S., Roesken-Winter, B., & Leuders, T. (2019). Which research can support PD facilitators? Strategies for content-related PD research in the Three-Tetrahedron Model. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 22(5), 407–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-019-09434-3 | DOI 10.1007/s10857-019-09434-3
[58] Preiss, D. D., Calcagni, E., Espinoza, A. M., & Grau, V. (2016). ¿Cómo se enseña el lenguaje y las matemáticas en las salas de primer y segundo ciclo básico en Chile? Principales hallazgos de una serie de estudios observacionales en clases de lenguaje y matemáticas [What are Spanish language and mathematics teaching like in primary and middle schools in Chile? Main findings from a series of observational studies in Spanish language and mathematics lessons]. In J. Manzi & M. R. García (Eds.), Abriendo las puertas del aula: Transformación de las prácticas docentes [Opening up the classroom doors: Transforming teaching practices] (pp. 1 53–184). Ediciones UC. | DOI 10.5565/rev/educar.1896
[59] Rainio, A. P., & Hofmann, R. (2015). Transformations in teachers’ discourse about their students during a school-led pedagogic intervention. The European Journal of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 13(2), 1815–1829. https://doi.org/10.15405/ejsbs.163 | DOI 10.15405/ejsbs.163
[60] Reiser, B. J., Michaels, S., Moon, J., Bell, T., Dyer, E., Edwards, K. D., McGill, T. A. W., Novak, M., & Park, A. (2017). Scaling up three-dimensional science learning through teacher-led study groups across a state. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(3), 280–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487117699598 | DOI 10.1177/0022487117699598
[61] Resnick, L. B., Asterhan, C. S. C., Clarke, S. N., & Schantz, F. (2018). Next generation research in dialogic learning. In G. E. Hall, L. F. Quinn, & D. M. Gollnick (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of teaching and learning (pp. 323–338). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118955901.ch13 | DOI 10.1002/9781118955901.ch13
[62] Ruthven, K., Mercer, N., Taber, K. S., Guardia, P., Hofmann, R., Ilie, S., Luthman, S., & Riga, F. (2018). A research-informed dialogic-teaching approach to early secondary school mathematics and science: The pedagogical design and field trial of the epiSTEMe intervention. Research Papers in Education, 32(1), 18–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2015.1129642 | DOI 10.1080/02671522.2015.1129642
[63] Segal, A., Lefstein, A., & Vedder-Weiss, D. (2018). Appropriating protocols for the regulation of teacher professional conversations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70(2), 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.018 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.018
[64] Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511499944
[65] Šeďová, K., Šalamounová, Z., & Švaříček, R. (2014). Troubles with dialogic teaching. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 3(4), 274–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2014.04.001
[66] Taylor, S. J., Bogdan, R., & DeVault, M. (2015). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource. (4th Ed.). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781394260485.fmatter
[67] Tekkumru-Kisa, M., & Stein, M. K. (2017). Designing, facilitating, and scaling-up video-based professional development: supporting complex forms of teaching in science and mathematics. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0087-y | DOI 10.1186/s40594-017-0087-y
[68] van Es, E., & Sherin, M. (2009). The influence of video clubs on teachers’ thinking and practice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13(2), 155–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-009-9130-3 | DOI 10.1007/s10857-009-9130-3
[69] van Es, E., Tunney, J., Goldsmith, L. T., & Seago, N. (2014). A framework for the facilitation of teachers’ analysis of video. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(4), 340–356. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487114534266 | DOI 10.1177/0022487114534266
[70] van Es, E. (2010). A framework for facilitating productive discussions in video clubs. Educational Technology, 50(1), 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487114534266
[71] Vedder-Weiss, D., Segal, A., & Lefstein, A. (2019). Teacher face-work in discussions of videorecorded classroom practice: Constraining or catalyzing opportunities to learn? Journal of Teacher Education, 70(5), 538–551. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487119841895 | DOI 10.1177/0022487119841895
[72] Vrikki, M., Kershner, R., Calcagni, E., Hennessy, S., Lee, L., Hernández, F., Estrada, N., & Ahmed, F. (2019a). The teacher scheme for educational dialogue analysis (T-SEDA): Developing a research-based observation tool for supporting teacher inquiry into pupils’ participation in classroom dialogue. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 42(2), 185–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2018.1467890 | DOI 10.1080/1743727x.2018.1467890
[73] Vrikki, M., Wheatley, L., Howe, C., Hennessy, S. & Mercer, N. (2019b). Dialogic practices in primary school classrooms, Language and Education, 33(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2018.1509988 | DOI 10.1080/09500782.2018.1509988
[74] Wells, G., & Arauz, R. M. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379–428. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1503_3
[75] Wilkinson, I. A. G., Reznitskaya, A., Bourdage, K., Oyler, J., Glina, M., Drewry, R., Kim, M.-Y., & Nelson, K. (2017). Toward a more dialogic pedagogy: Changing teachers’ beliefs and practices through professional development in language arts classrooms. Language and Education, 31(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2016.1230129 | DOI 10.1080/09500782.2016.1230129
[76] Zhang, M., Lundeberg, M., & Eberhardt, J. (2011). Strategic facilitation of problem-based discussion for teacher professional development. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(3), 342–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.553258 | DOI 10.1080/10508406.2011.553258
This research was funded by CONICYT/ANID through its doctoral funding scheme Becas Chile 2015 N° 72160185 in partnership with The Cambridge Trust. Queens' College and the Faculty of Education at the University of Cambridge provided funding for the field trips. Financial support for the preparation of the manuscript was provided by Programa de Inserción Académica 2024, Vicerrectoría Académica y Prorrectoría, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile.
Copyright © 2026 Studia paedagogica