In this rejoinder, I first provide a more detailed account of the discourse-focused professional development activities facilitated as part of the SMIT'N program, specifically addressing issues raised by van Zee with regard to the institute's overall format, goals and development strategies. Next, I resort to Peter Medawar's metaphorical view of inquiry as scientific storytelling to reflect about Bencze's expressed opposition to "politely guided quasi-inductive science inquiry instruction" and highlight the need for science educators to give more careful consideration to oral classroom discourse. I then conclude by describing how guided science inquiry teaching can be conceived in terms of the theoretical notion of negative politeness.