Effectiveness of dialogic learning actions in school settings to improve the inclusion of ethnic minority and migrant students: a qualitative meta-synthesis of observational and ethnographic studies

Background Increasing ethnic and linguistic diversity in classrooms has intensified the need for pedagogical strategies that support the inclusion of ethnic-minority and migrant students. Dialogic learning, grounded in Vygotsky's sociocultural theory and Freire's critical pedagogy, has been proposed as one such strategy, but the empirical evidence base remains scattered across heterogeneous study designs. This review aimed to synthesise observational and ethnographic evidence on the contribution of dialogic learning actions to the academic, linguistic, identity-related, socio-emotional and socio-political dimensions of inclusion in school settings. Methods We conducted a qualitative meta-synthesis informed by a systematic search strategy, reported in accordance with PRISMA 2020 and registered prospectively in PROSPERO (CRD420251236020). We searched Web of Science, Scopus and ERIC (1980–2025) and complemented the database search with backward and forward citation tracking and a focused grey-literature search. Two reviewers independently screened all titles, abstracts and full texts, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Methodological quality was appraised with the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Qualitative Checklist and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT, 2018). Confidence in each meta-synthesis finding was rated using GRADE-CERQual. Results Eight studies ( n = 92 participants from Spain, Chile, the United States and Australia) met the eligibility criteria. Seven studies were qualitative or ethnographic and one used a mixed-methods communicative approach. Inductive coding and constant comparison generated five interrelated analytical categories: (i) equal voice and distributed participation; (ii) dialogic mediation of academic language; (iii) dialogue as a space for identity reconstruction and empowerment; (iv) dialogic socio-emotional climate; and (v) dialogic teaching as a practice of social justice and critical interculturality. Confidence in the underlying findings ranged from low-moderate to moderate-high, depending on the number, geographic spread and methodological strength of the supporting studies. Conclusions The available qualitative evidence is consistent with the hypothesis that dialogic learning actions can contribute to multidimensional educational inclusion, but the evidence base is geographically concentrated, methodologically heterogeneous and limited in size. Findings should therefore be interpreted as plausible analytical generalisations rather than definitive causal claims. Future research should prioritise longitudinal, comparative and intersectional designs in underrepresented regions and across linguistic profiles.