Increasing student engagement with the social practices of science (i.e., communication, collaboration, and critique) is a goal throughout K-16 science education and provides an opportunity for science educators to leverage student discourse to optimize learning. Yet how instructors can encourage forms of discourse which predict increased achievement remain unclear. We examined how structured interdependence shifted student discourse and learning for student groups (n = 78) completing collaborative learning activities in undergraduate science classrooms. All discourse was recorded (3,628 student talk turns) and coded. Results showed that groups experiencing structured interdependence had higher rates of science accuracy, idea reiteration, and justification, as well as higher assessment performance. An additional examination of discourse found accuracy and justification of ideas to have greater presence in the highest performing groups overall. The "in common" nature of discourse shifts between both interdependency groups and those with the highest performance suggest that interdependent structuring may promote learning through shifting idea accuracy and justification during talk. These findings support that interdependency may be a pragmatic step for increasing undergraduate student engagement with social practices of science in laboratory settings.