Teachers' readiness and pedagogical change in curriculum reform: why dialogic and critical pedagogy fail to take root in Indonesia primary schools

Purpose This study examines why dialogic and critical pedagogy remain difficult to enact in Indonesian primary schools by analysing teachers' sense-making, and the sociocultural, institutional and professional conditions that shape classroom interaction. It also investigates how a structured dialogic scaffold – the SOCRATIC model (stimulate, observe, collaborate, reason, act, reflective thinking, integrate conclude)– can serve as an initial support for teachers' engagement with reform-aligned pedagogical approaches. Design/methodology/approach The study employs a convergent mixed-methods design across seven public and religious primary schools in Indonesia. Quantitative survey data were collected from 36 teachers and 301 students to capture patterns of instructional practice, perceived readiness and classroom participation. Qualitative data were generated through classroom observations and semi-structured interviews with teachers. The qualitative analysis followed an iterative thematic coding process informed by scholarship on dialogic pedagogy, teacher agency and curriculum reform. Methodological triangulation was used to examine convergence and divergence between reported beliefs, observed practices and interactional patterns. Findings The findings indicate that the enactment of dialogic pedagogy is constrained by interconnected systemic conditions, including fragmented professional development, resource disparities, assessment misalignment, and entrenched hierarchical classroom norms. Cultural expectations related to authority, harmony and moral responsibility further shape how teachers make sense of reform mandates and regulate classroom talk. The SOCRATIC intervention demonstrates that structured routines and predictable discourse scaffolds can support short-term variation in teacher facilitation and student participation. However, the extent of these changes varies across classrooms and remains contingent on institutional coherence, teacher agency, and culturally grounded interpretations of pedagogical authority. Research limitations/implications This study is conducted across seven primary schools within a single Indonesian province, which limits the generalisability of the findings across diverse regional, socio-economic and institutional contexts. While the convergent mixed-methods design enabled in-depth examination of variation across schools, classroom observations were necessarily bounded in time, constraining the analysis of longer-term shifts in discourse practices and pedagogical routines. The study therefore captures patterns of enactment and short-term variation rather than sustained transformation. Future research could extend this work through longitudinal designs, comparative studies across provinces with distinct cultural and institutional norms, and analyses of how system-level factors–such as leadership practices, supervision mechanisms and assessment reform–shape teachers' sustained uptake of dialogic pedagogy. Practical implications The findings suggest that dialogic pedagogy becomes more feasible when teachers are supported with structured scaffolds, concrete discourse routines, and ongoing school-based support. Professional development initiatives may be more effective when they prioritise modelling, guided practice, and collaborative inquiry, rather than relying on one-off training sessions. At the school level, structured routines–such as the SOCRATIC steps–can function as practical supports that help teachers manage classroom discussion, reduce perceived instructional risks, and expand opportunities for student reasoning. However, the sustainability of such practices depends on system-level alignment across curriculum, assessment, supervision, and coaching structures. Taken in this way, the study offers actionable yet context-sensitive insights for policymakers, school leaders, and teacher educators seeking to operationalise inquiry-driven and participatory learning in primary education. Social implications Strengthening dialogic and critical pedagogy carries broader social significance in a diverse society such as Indonesia, where respect, harmony, and pluralism are central civic values. Classroom environments that encourage questioning, attentive listening and shared reasoning may support the development of dispositions associated with democratic participation, tolerance, and peaceful coexistence. The findings from this study suggest that structured dialogic approaches, such as the SOCRATIC model, have the potential to expand student voice within educational contexts traditionally shaped by hierarchy and deference. When situated within supportive professional and institutional conditions, efforts to strengthen dialogic practices may contribute–over time–to fostering more reflective, empathetic, and engaged learners, aligning with national aspirations for deep learning, character education, and social cohesion. Originality/value This study contributes to scholarship on pedagogical reform in the Global South by foregrounding the interaction between structural conditions and teachers' sense-making processes in shaping dialogic practice. Rather than evaluating dialogic pedagogy as a uniform intervention, it offers empirical insight into how a structured dialogic model can function both as a transitional scaffold and as a diagnostic lens for identifying conditions necessary for scalable, context-sensitive pedagogical change in hierarchical and resource-constrained educational contexts.