Purpose: After interviewing teachers about their beliefs on discussion, the author observed four English teachers as they led class discussions. The purpose of this study is to see what kinds of discussion were happening, and what teachers were doing to facilitate those discussions. Design/methodology/approach: The author observed six English class sessions with discussion as a technique and transcribed each. To analyze the discussion events (DEs), the author focused on the addressivity of the teachers' comments, and plotted the DEs on a four-quadrant system of analysis. The quadrants helped to move beyond the value-laden dichotomy between monologic and dialogic discussion, and to better understand what teachers are doing. Findings: The majority of class sessions were classified as convergent-active but teachers used a variety of discussions. In particular, teachers were concerned about control, so they used three techniques to keep procedural control as follows: taking over the discussion, creating specific procedures and using the Initiation-Response-Evaluation format in different ways. Originality/value: Instead of focusing on a dichotomy this method of analysis opens up the possibility for labeling different kinds of dialogic instruction, like the teacher-as-conductor form of convergent-active discussions. This can help teachers understand that addressivity and purpose matter as they create their discussions but also that various forms of discussion are necessary in the classroom. Incorporating dialogic instruction has been difficult for teachers; this method can help describe what they are doing while not devaluing the kinds of discussion that are taking place.