Internationalisation in Educational
Research: The example of researchon educational dialogue
Rupert Wegerif
University of Cambridge, UK

My new research group at Cambridge - CEDIR

The 4 ages of research (Adams, 2013)
1. The age of the individual–

Newton, Leibniz, Darwin

2. The age of the institution––

The Humboldtian model of the research university (1810)
The Royal Institution UK (adopts research in 1862)

3. The age of national research enterprise––Foundation of mission-led Research Councils (UK)
National Science Foundation (1950, USA)

4. The age of international research networks––––

1984 – European Framework Program (now starting 8th H2020)1987 – Human Frontier Science Program led by JapanThe researcher as an individual remains, but the structure of success has evolved
Engagement with research users has – perhaps – gone back to its roots

The 4th Age of Research• Most highly cited work is international (50% increase
with papers with authors in more than one country)• In 2012: 48% of UK papers had no overseas author(down from 85% in the 1980s)• US: 67% of research is still domestic (1981: 94%)
• Japan and China: 75% of research is produced incountry‘The Fourth Age of Research’: implications and actions for global universities Professor
Sir Steve Smith and Dr Jonathan Adams, British Council in Tokyo, 9 December 2014

‘The Fourth Age of Research’: implications and actions for global universities Professor
Sir Steve Smith and Dr Jonathan Adams, British Council in Tokyo, 9 December 2014

It is about being on the map. Being visible. Being part of the global
dialogue of science.

UK Research Assessement
Four star

Quality that is world-leading in terms oforiginality, significance and rigour.

Three star

Quality that is internationally excellent interms of originality, significance and rigour but
which falls short of the highest standards ofexcellence.

Two star

Quality that is recognised internationally interms of originality, significance and rigour.

One star

Quality that is recognised nationally in terms oforiginality, significance and rigour.

Unclassified

Quality that falls below the standard of nationallyrecognised work. Or work which does not meetthe published definition of research for thepurposes of this assessment.

Unfair to education?
Education research is often
embedded in local school contexts
and so is harder to internationalize.
But this is not necessarily true.
Many issues are of interest to theworld. For example‘lesson study’ in Japan
has now gone global.

Example: Education Dialogue
In 1990’s in UK primary schools there were notmany computers
Teacher’s used them for groups of children
They said ‘good for communication’We video recorded the groups and showed theteachers. They were not happy.
Then we developed a way to ‘teach good talk forlearning’.

(Class 5 D) Rules for Talk
1. Everyone should have a chance
to talk

2. Everyone’s
listened toideasshouldbe

3. Each member of the groupshould be asked- what do you think?
- why do you think that?

4. Look and listen to the person
talking
5. After discussion, the groupshould agree on a group ideaWe evaluated the effects of ourteaching•

Pre

PostOn group thinking and individual thinking

International conferences and publications
Wegerif, R (1996) Beyond Piaget and Vygotsky: towards a
dialogical understanding of reason and learning to reason. The
2nd Socio-Cultural Conference: Piaget and Vygotsky Centenary, atGeneva.
Wegerif, R. and Mercer, N. (1996) Using computer-based discourse
analysis to explore the construction of shared knowledge inconversations. Paper read at 5th International Pragmatics
Conference. Mexico City, Mexico.
Wegerif, R. (1995) Using computers to improve the quality ofclassroom talk. Nijmegen, Netherlands. Wegerif, R. (1995)
Computers and reasoning through talk across the curriculum.
Presented paper at Problem Solving Across the Curriculum.
Rochester, New York, USA.
Wegerif, R. (1995) Using computers to help support exploratory
talk across the curriculum. Paper read at Conference of Computer
Assisted Learning (CAL'95). Cambridge, UK
Wegerif, R. and Mercer, N. (1994) Vygotsky, computers andreasoning through talk in the classroom. Paper read at 24th
International Congress of Applied Psychology. Madrid.
Wegerif, R. (1993) The nature and genesis of critical thinking skills.
Paper read at the International Conference of Computers inEducation, Taipei. Taiwan

Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., and Dawes, L. (1999)
From social interaction to individual
reasoning: an empirical investigation of a
possible socio-cultural model of cognitivedevelopment. Learning and Instruction. 9(5): 493-516.
Wegerif, R., Mercer, N. And L. Dawes (1998)
Software Design to Support Discussion in thePrimary Classroom. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning. 14 (3): 199-211
Wegerif, R., and N. Mercer. (1997) Using
computer-based text analysis to integratequantitative and qualitative methods in theinvestigation of collaborative learning.
Language and Education, Vol. 11. (4): 271287.
Wegerif, R., and N. Mercer. (1996) Computersand reasoning through talk in the classroom.
Language and Education 10 (1): 47-64.
Wegerif, R. (1996) Using computers to help
coach exploratory talk across the curriculum.
Computers and Education 26 (1-3): 51-60.
Wegerif, R. (1996) Collaborative learning anddirective software. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning 12 (1): 22-32

Slowly the research was picked up• Mexico – Sylvia Rojas-Drummond• South Africa- Paul Webb• Finland – Antii Rajala• Belgium – Jan T’Sas• Spain – Manoli PifarreOne good research issue:
does it transfer?
Wegerif, R., Linares, J. P., Rojas-Drummond, S.,
Mercer, N., & Velez, M. (2005). Thinking
together in the UK and Mexico: Transfer of an
educational innovation. Journal of Classroom
Interaction, 40-48.
Yang, Y. (2016). Lessons learnt fromcontextualising a UK teaching thinking programin a conventional Chinese classroom. Thinking
Skills and Creativity, 19, 198-209.

Collaborative projects (EU)Science Education for Diversity– India, Malaysia, Lebanon, Turkey, NL(1 million euro)

Metafora: Learning to learn
together with CSCL tools
Israel, Germany, Greece, Spain, UK(4 million Euro)
Leading to publications with authors in different
countriesinternational writing
In press for 2019
The Routledge International
Handbook of Research on
Dialogic Education
46 authors from 19
countries and 5 continents
The 2015 Routledge
International Handbook of
Research on TeachingThinking
37 authors from 15
countries and 5 continents

My career• 1996 PhD + International conferences, publications
and projects => Senior Research Fellow then
• 2004 Reader at Southampton (Associate Prof) why?
REF – international and world leading researchpublications• 2006 Professor at Exeter. Why? International Journal,International Projects, International Publications• 2017 Cambridge. Endowed Chair. Why? Internationalprofile. It is a global university and needsinternationally known professors

International members of group: USA, AUS, AZ, NO,HK, Japan, Italy, Israel etc

Science IS global
Good ideas spread in every area ofscience
Lesson Study developed in Japan isspreading globally (and changing)
Dialogic Education or‘Thinking Together’ developed inUK is spreading (and changing)
Being part of the international
sharing and debating of ideas has
many potential benefits
Internationalisation helped me –perhaps it could also help youThank you for listening!
Some references••••••••••

Adams, J. (2013). Collaborations: The fourth age of research. Nature, 497(7451), 557.
Leite, D & Miorando B (2015) How Education is (not) coping with science evaluation in the Fourth Age ofResearch: collaboration as a pathway for educational knowledge production. Conference: AVALIES. At:
http://www.ufrgs.br/avalies/anais-do-evento/artigos-1/145750
Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: ways of helping children touse language to learn science. British educational research journal, 30(3), 359-377.
Rajala, A., Hilppö, J., & Lipponen, L. (2012). The emergence of inclusive exploratory talk in primary
students’ peer interaction. International Journal of Educational Research, 53, 55-67.
T'Sas, J. (2018). Learning outcomes of exploratory talk in collaborative activities (Doctoral dissertation,University of Antwerp).
Wagner, C. S., Park, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). The continuing growth of global cooperation networks
in research: A conundrum for national governments. PLoS One, 10(7), e0131816.
Webb, P., & Treagust, D. F. (2006). Using exploratory talk to enhance problem-solving and reasoning skills
in grade-7 science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 36(4), 381-401.
Wegerif, R. (1996). Using computers to help coach exploratory talk across the curriculum. Computers &Education, 26(1-3), 51-60.
Wegerif, R., Linares, J. P., Rojas-Drummond, S., Mercer, N., & Velez, M. (2005). Thinking together in the UK
and Mexico: Transfer of an educational innovation. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 40-48.
Yang, Y. (2016). Lessons learnt from contextualising a UK teaching thinking program in a conventional
Chinese classroom. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 19, 198-209.