This research study investigates the challenges and opportunities of dialogic pedagogy in multicultural education within a conventional higher education institution. The study findings suggest that in spite of the several challenges that dialogic pedagogy faced in the context of conventional education, dialogic pedagogy also experienced several successes. One of the challenges of dialogic pedagogy was the institutional setting itself. Conventional education, with its insistence on preset end goals and objectives that needed to be met to ensure the continuity of the course and the accreditation of teacher education agencies might have led to the monologism of the multicultural curriculum in this study. Moreover, the demands of the institution coupled with the instructor's orientation toward an instructional class dialogue and the monologism of some students might have suppressed dialogic pedagogy among several class members in this study. Thus, the study sheds some light on how people could be monologic about the class discussion for different reasons. On the other hand, the study found limited successes for dialogic pedagogy in the above mentioned monologic educational context. The first opportunity was represented in the dialogic provocations that were provided by monologic participants. These dialogic provocations took several forms. At times, monologic participants, insistent on their own viewpoints, provided other class members with different aspects of any certain topic to think about and to consider. These different aspects revealed the complexity of the decision making process involved in any teaching situation especially that involving cultural diversity. At other times, these dialogic provocations emerged when students in the class, including the monologic ones, felt the need to invite voices of the communities studied to the class discussion. These different dialogic provocations helped create limited polyphony in the monologic environment of the conventional higher education institution. These provocations also allowed some students to appreciate the learning that they gained from the views and subjectivities of their classmates. This appreciation reflected a dialogicity that emerged in the class and after the class in which students seemed to have continued engaging in the dialogue on the topics of the curriculum beyond the time and space of the class. A last finding in this study discussed students who were ready to engage in the dialogue and revealed that a desire to dialogue with another was driven by intellectual curiosity in one case and an appreciation for diversity in general in the other. This specific finding is set against the other findings that discussed monologic students to suggest that monologism and dialogism are not essential or deterministic; instead, they are often either driven or hindered by personal inquiry and an appreciation for the word of another. In the presence of these two, dialogic pedagogy was possible even under the condition of a monologic context. This suggests that the monologic context was not enough to hinder the dialogue, and places the onus on the participants rather than the institution, for dialogic pedagogy to take place and to prosper. I will discuss this final point in more detail at the end of this chapter. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]