The Power Of Dialogue In Social Systems

  • Patrick M. Jenlink

The primary challenge to global society, as we pass the threshold of a new millennium, is to transform existing social systems, and therefore American society, in such ways as to embody a more inclusive, democratic, and openended communicative spirit. Necessary to this transformation is a social discourse that enables the power and potential of global citizens to be realized. Dialogue is such a discourse that enables citizens in unconcealing societal patterns and structures, which guide and direct individual and collective interactions within and across events and activities. Engaging in dialogue, as a social discourse of creative possibility, with others in our daily lives can contribute to change in our selves and society. This type of systems change requires that we unconceal the powerful, fragmented, and constraining forces that drive individuals and communities to continue using old systems of thought and beliefs. Unconcealing these systems of thought and belief that inform and otherwise reify existing social structures and cultures patterns is necessary to transforming society. Dialogue is transformative, and is understood as a form of conversation or discourse that creates a context in which individuals and collectives are


Mental Model Dialogue Process Inferential Process Social Discourse Successful Dialogue 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bakhtin, M., 1981. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays by M.M. Bakhtin/(Michael Holquist, Ed.). University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  2. Bakhtin, M., 1986. Speech Genres. Dalton, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Banathy, B.H., 1996. Designing Social systems in a Changing World. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Bauman, Z., 1988-1989. Strangers: The social construction of universality and particularity. Telos, 28:23.Google Scholar
  5. Bohm, D., 1983. Wholeness and the Implicate Order. ARK Paperbacks, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Bohm, D., 1985. Unfolding Meaning. ARK Paperbacks, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Bohm, D., 1996. On Dialogue. Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Bohm, D., 1994. Thought as a System. Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Bohm, D., and Edwards, M., 1990. Changing Consciousness. Harper, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  10. Bohm, D., and Peat, F.D., 1987. Science, Order, and Creativity. Bantam Books, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Booth, W. B., 1974. Dogma and The Rhetoric of Assent. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  12. Buber, M., 1958. I and Thou (Second Edition). Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Buber, M., 1965. Between Man and Man. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Buber, M., 1965/1988. The Knowledge of Man: Selected Essays. Humanities Press International, Inc., Atlantic Highlands, NJ.Google Scholar
  15. Burbules, N.C., 1993. Dialogue in Teaching. Teacher College Press, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Burbles, N.C., and Rice, S., 1991. Dialogue across differences: Continuing the conversation. Harvard Educational Review, 61(4): 393-416.Google Scholar
  17. Capranzano, V., 1990. On dialogue. In T. Maranhão (Ed.), The Interpretation of Dialogue. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 270-291.Google Scholar
  18. de Mare, P., Piper, R., and Thompson, S., 1991. Koinonia: From Hate, Through Dialogue, to Culture in the Large Group. Karnac Books, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Derrida, J., 1982. Difference, in Margins of Philosophy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 1-27.Google Scholar
  20. Ford-Slack, P.J., 1995. Reflections on Community: Understanding the familiar in the heart of the stranger. In, L. Lambert, D. Walker, D.P. Zimmerman, J.E. Cooper, M.D. Lambert, M.E. Gardner, and P.J. Ford-Slack, The Constructivist Leader. Teachers College Press, New York, pp. 159-170.Google Scholar
  21. Friedman, M., 1976.”Dialogue of touchstones”: An approach to communication and identity. Communication, 2:143-157.Google Scholar
  22. Friedman, M., 1992. Dialogue and the Human Image: Beyond Humanistic Psychology. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.Google Scholar
  23. Friere, P., 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Herder & Herder, New York.Google Scholar
  24. Friere, P., 1985. The Politics of Education: Culture, Power and Liberation. Bergin & Garvey, South Hadley, MA.Google Scholar
  25. Fritz, R., 1989. The Path of Least Resistance: Learning to Become the Creative Force in Your Own Life. Fawcett Columbine, New York.Google Scholar
  26. Fullan, M.G., 1993. Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform. New York: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  27. Fullan, M.G., 1996. Turning systemic thinking on its head. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(6): 420-423.Google Scholar
  28. Heidegger, M., 1971. Poetry, Language, and Thought. (Trans. A. Hofstadter). Harper & Row, New York.Google Scholar
  29. Isaacs, W. N., 1993. Dialogue, collective thinking, and organizational learning. Organizational Dynamics, 22(2): 24-39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Isaacs, W.N., 1996. The process and potential of dialogue in social change. Educational Technology, 35(1): 20-30.Google Scholar
  31. Jenlink, P.M., 1995. Educational change systems: A systems design process for systemic change. In, P.M. Jenlink (Ed.), Systemic Change: Touchstones for the Future School. IRI/Skylight Training and Publishing, Inc., Palatine, IL, pp. 41-67.Google Scholar
  32. Jenlink, P. M., 1999, February. Dialogue as Inquiry Method: Examining Issues of Relationships, Reflexivity and Self-consciousness. Paper presented at the Advances in Qualitative Methods Conference, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.Google Scholar
  33. Jenlink, P.M., and Carr, A.A., 1996. Conversation as a medium for change in education. Educational Technology, 36(1): 31-38.Google Scholar
  34. Kuhn, T.S., 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions, Second Edition, Enlarged. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  35. Lewin, K., 1951. Field Theory in Social Science: Selected Theoretical Papers. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  36. May, R., 1969. Love and Will. Norton, New York.Google Scholar
  37. Merleau-Ponty, M., 1962/1967. Phenomenology of Perception. Humanities Press, New York.Google Scholar
  38. Noddings, N., 1984. Caring: A Feminine Approach To Ethics and Moral Education. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  39. Sarason, S.B., 1990. The Predictable Failure of Educational Reform: Can We Change Course Before It’s Too Late. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  40. Saussure, F., 1959. Course in General linguistics. (Ed. Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, Trans. Wade Baskin). Philosophical Library, New York.Google Scholar
  41. Schwartz, P., and Ogilvy, J., 1979. The Emergent Paradigm: Changing Patterns of Thought and Belief. Analytical Report of Values and Lifestyles Program. SRI International, Menlo Park, CA.Google Scholar
  42. Senge, P.M., 1990. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday/Currency, New York.Google Scholar
  43. Senge, P. M., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., and Smith, B., 1994. The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. Doubleday/Currency, New York.Google Scholar
  44. Sidorkin, A.M., 1999. Beyond Discourse: Education, The Self, and Dialogue. State University of New York Press, New York.Google Scholar
  45. Stewart, J., 1978. Foundations of dialogic communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 64:183-201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Todorov, T., 1984. Mikhail Bakhtin: The Dialogical Principle. (Trans. by Wlad Godzich). University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  47. Young, I.M., 1990. The idea of community and the politics of difference. In, L.J. Nicholson (Ed.), Feminism Postmodernism. Routledge, New York, pp. 300-320.Google Scholar
  48. Zeldin, T.,1994. Intimate History of humanity. Harper Collins, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick M. Jenlink

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations