Co-constructing novel science stories or reciting epic narratives? : A case of science teaching in upper primary school

Lina Varg

doi:10.31129/LUMAT.12.3.2284

Authors

Lina Varg Umeå University, Sweden https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4668-3463

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.12.3.2284

Keywords:

primary/elementary school science, dialogue, co-construction, novel science story, epic science story

Abstract

Although research findings have emphasized the importance of students being engaged in dialogue and co-construction of science knowledge, implementing the teaching required to promote such engagement is challenging for teachers. Co-construction is crucial not only for students' understanding of science content but also for their familiarity with some of the attributes associated with the nature of science (NOS). Inquiry-based science classroom discourses could facilitate NOS familiarization processes by promoting creativity and collaboration in upper primary school. This article presents findings from a case study of how one teacher created and navigated opportunities for students’ co-construction of science stories in a grade 6 class (age 12) working on the topic “Substances around us”. To examine the classroom dialogue and the teacher’s enablement of students’ co-construction in class, observation data were gathered over seven weeks and analysed using principles indicative of classroom dialogue. Findings show that while opportunities for co-construction were created in science class through for example open-ended questions, the teacher’s use of IRE, complemented with boosted communication for evaluation of student answers, often hampered dialogue and co-construction of novel science stories regardless of how the teaching was organized.

References

Akerson, V.L., Carter, I., Pongsanon, K., & Nargund-Joshi, V. (2019). Teaching and Learning Nature of Science in Elementary Classrooms: Research-Based Strategies for Practical Implementation. Science & Education, 28(3-5), 391–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00045-1

Alexander, R. J. (2020). A dialogic teaching companion. London: Routledge.

Anderhag, P., Wickman, P.-O., Bergqvist, K., Jakobson, B., Hamza, K. M., & Säljö, R. (2016). Why Do Secondary School Students Lose Their Interest in Science? Or Does it Never Emerge? A Possible and Overlooked Explanation. Science Education (Salem, Mass.), 100(5), 791–813. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21231

Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: four essays. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Bennion, A., Bismarck, A.S., Davis, E.A. and Palincsar, A.S. (2022). The Resources of Instructional Contexts: Examples From New Elementary Science Teachers. Journal of Education (Boston, Mass.). 0(0), 1-14.

Bensaude-Vincent, B. (2006). Textbooks on the Map of Science Studies. Science & education. 15(7-8), 667–670.

Burns, R. B., & Anderson, L. W. (1987). The activity structure of lesson segments. Curriculum Inquiry, 17(1), 31-53.

Clarà, M. (2021). Conceptually driven inquiry: addressing the tension between dialogicity and teleology in dialogic approaches to classroom talk. Educational Review (Birmingham), 1-20.

Clough, M. P., & Olson, J. K. (2004). The Nature of Science Always Part of the Science Story: Strategies for communicating what science is and how science works. The Science Teacher (National Science Teachers Association), 71(9), 28–31.

DiGiuseppe, M. (2014). Representing Nature of Science in a Science Textbook: Exploring author-editor-publisher interactions. International journal of science education. 36(7), 1061–1082.

Forbes, A. & Skamp, K. (2013). Knowing and learning about science in primary school “communities of science practice” : the views of participating scientists in the MyScience initiative. Research in Science Education (Australasian Science Education Research Association), 43(3), 1005–1028. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9295-0

Galili, I. (2019). Towards a Refined Depiction of Nature of Science: Applications to Physics Education. Science & education. 28(3-5), 503–537.

Garnier, H. E., Lemmens, M., Druker, S. L., & Roth, K. J. (2011). Third international mathematics and science study 1999 video study technical report: volume 2 – science. Technical report. NCES 2011-049. National Center for Education Statistics.

Grobstein, P. (2005). Revisiting science in culture: Science as story telling and story revising. Journal of Research Practice, 1(1), 1–18.

Howe, C., Hennessy, S., Mercer, N., Vrikki, M., & Wheatley, L. (2019). Teacher–student dialogue during classroom teaching: does it really impact on student outcomes? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(4-5), 462-512.

Iyengar, S., and Massey, D.S. (2019). Scientific communication in a post-truth society. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS. 116(16), 7656–7661.

Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: how to follow scientists and engineers through society. Harvard Univ. Press.

Leden, L., Hansson, L., Redfors, A., & Ideland, M. (2015). Teachers’ Ways of Talking About Nature of Science and Its Teaching. Science & Education, 24(9–10), 1141–1172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9782-6

Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290404

Lidar, M., Engström, S., Lundqvist, E., & Almqvist, J. (2019). Undervisningstraditioner i naturvetenskaplig undervisning i relation till svenska utbildningsreformer i skolår 6. Nordina: Nordic studies in science education, 15(2), 174–192. https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.5893

McComas, W. (Ed.). (2020). Nature of Science in Science Instruction: Rationales and Strategies (1st ed. 2020.). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6

Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U.P.

https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674420106

Menninga, A., van Geert, P., van Vondel, S., Steenbeek, H., & van Dijk, M. (2022). Teacher-Student Interaction Patterns Change During an Early Science Teaching Intervention. Research in Science Education (Australasian Science Education Research Association), 52(5), 1497–1523.

Molbæk, M., & Kristensen, R. M. (2019). Triangulation with video observation when studying teachers’ practice. Qualitative Research Journal, 20(1), 152-162.

Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Open University Press.

Oliveira, A.W. (2010). Improving teacher questioning in science inquiry discussions through professional development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 422–453. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20345

Oliveira, A. W., Akerson, V. L., Colak, H., Pongsanon, K., & Genel, A. (2012). The implicit communication of nature of science and epistemology during inquiry discussion. Science Education (Salem, Mass.), 96(4), 652–684. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21005

Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Crawford, B. A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88 (4), 610– 645.

Stodolsky, S. S. (1984). Teacher evaluation: the limits of looking. Educational Researcher, 13(9), 11-18.

Sutton, C. (1992). Words, science and learning. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

Swedish Research Council. (2017). Good research practice. VR1710. Stockholm: Swedish Research Council.

Tytler, R. (2010). Ways forward for primary science education: a review commissioned by the Swedish National Agency for Education. Deakin University, Melbourne, Vic.

van Eijck, M., & Roth, W. (2013). Imagination of science in education. From epics to novelization. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997). Reflective discourse: developing shared understandings in a physics classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 209-228.

Varg, L., Näs, H., & Ottander, C. (2022). Science teaching in upper primary school through the eyes of the practitioners. Nordina, 18(1), 128–142. https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.8320

Varg, L. (2023). From curriculum to enacted teaching of photosynthesis, the carbon cycle and sustainability in an upper primary school class. In Contributions from biology education research (pp. 219-). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-44792-1_16

Vrikki, M., Wheatley, L., Howe, C., Hennessy, S., & Mercer, N. (2019). Dialogic practices in primary school classrooms. Language and Education, 33(1), 85-100.

Watters, J. J., & Diezmann, C. M. (2016). Engaging elementary students in learning science: an analysis of classroom dialogue. Instructional Science, 44(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9364-7

Wells, G., & Arauz, R. M. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379-428.

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Östman, L. (2013). Att tillägna sig ämneskunskaper: att lära sig ett språkspel. In E. Lundqvist, R. Säljö, & L.Östman (Ed), Scientific literacy: teori och praktik (pp. 71-86). Gleerup.