White, E. J., & Janfada, M. (2025). Dialogic methodology for transdisciplinary practice-based research. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197764442.001.0001 [preview the introduction here]
Dialogic Methodology for Transdisciplinary Practice-Based Research by E. Jayne White and Mahtab Janfada is not just a book – it is an invitation, a provocation and a guide for scholars and practitioners seeking to engage with the complexity of meaning-making in the real world. Grounded in Mikhail Bakhtin’s philosophy, this text brings to life the messy, vibrant potential of dialogic methodology within practice-based research. It offers not a step-by-step manual but rather a rich, polyphonic conversation on how to ethically and creatively engage with the plurality of voices, perspectives and lived experiences that characterise real-life pedagogical and research contexts.
The authors begin by emphasising that dialogue is a living event, central to their approach: ‘a fundamental feature of dialogism orients towards the understandings that are generated – promoted, denied, fought for, or jostled with – and how they are represented in and for real-life social practices’ (p. 22). This sense of dialogue as dynamic, alive and transformative permeates every chapter. Through engaging narrative vignettes and insights from researchers deeply connected with Bakhtin’s ideas, the authors open up space for critical reflection and methodological innovation.
For me, reading this book was like looking in a mirror. My work on the PedPod by EX-PED-LAB podcast, aimed at exploring pedagogical innovations in Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC), was originally conceived as a creative way to combine dissemination and inquiry. Through conversations with researchers, educators and scholars across different regions, I hoped to uncover diverse understandings of pedagogical innovations – a concept often used to characterise research and practices. In this work, and most of my work, for that matter, I am adamant in the use of the plural in recognition of the many and diverse meanings to be shared with me. What I did not realise until encountering this book was how profoundly dialogic my approach already was. As the authors write, ‘to dialogise means to actively seek disruption to monologic forms of thought by staying open to different representations, juxtapositions and contradictions in practice. That is your methodological quest’ (p. 25).
This realisation prompted what I now understand as a ‘dialogisation’ of myself – a Bakhtinian refraction that allowed me to make sense of tensions in my own research practice. The book provided the language, conceptual grounding and courage to recognise that I had been working within dialogic methodology all along, even without naming it. It also gave me the permission to continue along this path, now with greater intentionality and scholarly support.
One of the book’s strengths lies in how it weaves together philosophical grounding and practical application. Each chapter builds toward a deeper understanding of dialogic methodology, culminating in a call to action: embrace the discomfort, accept the unfinishedness and live out research as a practice of ongoing ethical dialogue. Chapter 4, for example, introduces helpful orienting concepts – utterance, polyphony, chronotope, heteroglossia and answerability (to name a few) – that serve as analytical tools for researchers. These are not static terms but dynamic lenses through which to engage with research as a dialogic process.
As the authors rightly caution, dialogic methodology is not for the ‘weak-kneed’ (p. 40). It requires sustained engagement with texts, ideas and others. It demands bravery – the bravery to finish a study without a universal ‘answer,’ to represent multiple voices without collapsing them into consensus and to remain accountable to the tensions and contradictions inherent in any research encounter. The chapter on methodological red flags is especially useful here, outlining pitfalls such as extreme relativism, situationalism and collectivism that threaten the integrity of dialogic work (pp. 110-111).
In the context of my project using a podcast, this book has reshaped how I think about both data and dissemination. Each episode is now more clearly a site of co-authored and co-created meaning, rich with ideological displacements, tensions and opportunities for deeper insight. As I re-listen to past episodes and consider future ones, I find myself asking: What dialogues and discourses are at play? What tensions are being held or ignored? How might these interactions be analysed through the lenses of chronotope, utterance, or polyphony? And most importantly, am I truly answerable to the voices involved?
Indeed, answerability is a cornerstone of dialogic methodology. As the authors explain, ‘answerability requires the researcher (or author) to account for all the design choices they make along the way’ (p. 92). This ethical commitment calls for clarity not only in the representation of others but also in the self-reflexive orientation of the researcher. Dialogic methodology, then, is as much about internal dialogue as it is about external conversation. It is an ongoing reckoning with one’s positionality, accountability and responsibility.
Despite its depth, the book is accessible. Its conversational tone and inclusion of colourful personal narratives make it an engaging read, even for those who may be new to Bakhtin. I particularly appreciated the inclusion of a summary table (p. 58) on key Bakhtinian texts, which provides a roadmap for those, like me, who find his oeuvre intimidating. The encouragement to read ‘with’ Bakhtin rather than ‘about’ him (p. 63) is an empowering invitation to co-create meaning rather than passively consume theory.
What the book makes clear is that dialogic methodology is not about applying a set of tools but about adopting a stance – a commitment to plurality, tension, openness and hope. It is a refusal to finalise meaning, a resistance to certainty and a celebration of ambiguity. In this way, the methodology resonates with diverse social contexts, including marginalised communities whose voices are often silenced in traditional research frameworks. As the authors write, ‘dialogic methodology has the potential to bring to the fore … voices so that they might breathe authentically and agentively in practice’ (p. 145).
This perspective aligns powerfully with the possibilities I see in using podcasts as dialogic spaces. Media such as audio can serve as multimodal avenues for expression, making room for gestural, verbal, visual and even silent forms of discourse (p. 145). In this sense, dialogic methodology affirms the importance of diverse modalities in capturing the richness of practice and meaning.
Yet, embracing dialogic methodology midstream is not without its challenges. I have grappled with the fact that my project did not begin with an explicit dialogic rationale. This book, however, offers reassurance that what matters is not when you begin but how you proceed. Through narrative design justification (p. 94), return to philosophical underpinnings (p. 91) and attentiveness to tensions and answerability, it is possible to infuse dialogic principles into ongoing work. The journey is iterative, dialogic in its very unfolding.
Ultimately, this book is a powerful endorsement of dialogic methodology as a legitimate and rigorous framework for transdisciplinary, practice-based research. It is also a call for creativity, for bravery and for hope. The authors conclude with an ‘open closure,’ inviting readers to continue the dialogue, to stay with the questions and to embrace the messiness of research as a path toward speculative, ethical and inclusive futures.
For those seeking tidy answers or rigid frameworks, this book may frustrate. But for those willing to be undone, to think with and through dialogue and to engage in the ethical complexities of research with real people in real time, Dialogic Methodology for Transdisciplinary Practice-Based Research is nothing short of transformative. It is not the end of a conversation but the beginning of many.
