Many students find it hard to understand complex texts. To help with this, we carried out a year-long study using a method called Quality Talk in two fourth-grade classrooms. This approach involves small-group discussions led by the teacher, with the goal of improving both basic reading skills and deeper, more thoughtful understanding of what students read. As the year went on, we noticed some important changes. Teachers began stepping back during discussions, allowing students to take the lead. At the same time, students started to think more deeply—offering detailed explanations and exploring different ideas together. We also saw meaningful improvements in their reading test scores, especially when it came to understanding texts on both basic and advanced levels. These results suggest that structured small-group conversations can be a powerful way to help students grow as readers and thinkers.

Argumentation, classroom discussion, critical thinking

Alexander, P. A., Schallert, D. L., & Hare, V. C. (1991). Coming to terms: How researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge. Review of Educational Research, 61(3), 315–343.

Bennett, L., Gunn, A. A., & Mortimore, P. (2008). Teaching thinking in primary schools: The role of classroom discussion. Education 3–13, 36(3), 229–241.

Bråten, I., Strømsø, H. I., & Samuelstuen, M. S. (2011). The relationship between reading fluency and reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 24(7), 875–902.

Chinn, C. A., Buckland, L. A., & Samarapungavan, A. (2011). Expanding the dimensions of epistemic cognition: Arguments from philosophy and psychology. Educational Psychologist, 46(3), 141–167.

Chiu, M. M., & McBride-Chang, C. (2006). Gender, context, and reading: A comparison of students in 43 countries. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(4), 331–362.

Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.

Goldman, S. R., Duschl, R. A., Ellenbogen, K., Williams, R., Tzou, C., & Sherwood, R. (2010). Science inquiry in the classroom: Possibilities and pitfalls. Science Education, 94(5), 790–812.

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2014). Writing development and instruction. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, J. Riley, & M. Nystrand (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Writing Development (pp. 339–353). London: SAGE.

Iordanou, K., Kendeou, P., & Beker, K. (2016). Argumentative discourse and epistemic cognition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 45(3), 157–171.

Johnson, E. S., Jenkins, J. R., Petscher, Y., & Catts, H. W. (2009). How accurate are DIBELS oral reading fluency scores for predicting reading comprehension? Exceptional Children, 75(2), 160–173.

King, A. (1999). Discourse patterns for mediating peer learning. In A. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 87–115). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kuhn, D., Cheney, R., & Weinstock, M. (2000). The development of epistemological understanding. Cognitive Development, 15(3), 309–328.

Kuhn, D., Zillmer, N., Crowell, A., & Zavala, J. (2013). Developing norms of argumentation: Metacognitive, epistemological, and social dimensions of developing argumentative competence. Cognition and Instruction, 31(4), 456–496.

Lee, H. S., Liu, O. L., & Linn, M. C. (2016). Validating measurement of epistemic cognition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(3), 452–473.

Logan, S., & Johnston, R. (2009). Gender differences in reading ability and attitudes. Educational Review, 61(2), 89–113.

McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., & Blake, R. G. K. (2009). Rethinking reading comprehension instruction: A comparison of instruction for strategies and content approaches. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(3), 218–253.

Mercer, N. (1995). The Guided Construction of Knowledge: Talk Amongst Teachers and Learners. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Mercer, N. (2000). Words and Minds: How We Use Language to Think Together. London: Routledge.

Murphy, P. K., Wilkinson, I. A. G., Soter, A. O., Hennessey, M. N., & Alexander, J. F. (2009). Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 740–764.

Murphy, P. K., Firetto, C. M., Greene, J. A., Wei, L., & Xiao, Y. (2012). Quality Talk: Developing students’ discourse to promote high-level comprehension and critical-analytic thinking. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(1), 115–139.

Murphy, P. K., Greene, J. A., Allen, A. J., Basurto, E., & Wei, L. (2014). Fostering critical-analytic thinking in middle school classrooms. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 13, 1–14.

Murphy, P. K., Firetto, C. M. (2017). Reconsidering discussion-based approaches. In L. Corno & E. Anderman (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (3rd ed., pp. 297–312). Routledge.

Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(3), 317–344.

Reznitskaya, A., Kuo, L. J., Clark, A. M., & Hsu, Y. Y. (2008). Collaborative reasoning: A dialogic approach to group discussions. Cambridge Journal of Education, 38(1), 29–46.

Ryu, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2012). Improvements to elementary children's epistemic understanding from sustained argumentation. Science Education, 96(3), 488–526.

Soter, A. O., Wilkinson, I. A. G., Murphy, P. K., Rudge, L., Reninger, K. B., & Edwards, M. (2008). What the discourse tells us: Talk and indicators of high-level comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 47(6), 372–391.

U.S. Department of Education. (2015). The Nation’s Report Card: Reading 2015. National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences.

Wei, L., Murphy, P. K., & Firetto, C. M. (in press). Teacher discourse moves that support critical-analytic thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education.

Wu, X., Zhang, J., & Walberg, H. J. (2013). Gender and reading: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1155–1171.