Roles of Teachers in Orchestrating Learning in Elementary Science Classrooms

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Junqing Zhai ; Aik-Ling Tan
• 关键词：Scientific inquiry ; Teacher role ; Classroom discourse ; Elementary science ; Teacher ; directed ; Student ; directed
• 刊名：Research in Science Education
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：December 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：45
• 期：6
• 页码：907-926
• 全文大小：848 KB
• 参考文献：Abd-El-Khalick, F., BouJaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., & Tuan, H.-L. (2004). Inquiry in science education: international perspectives. Science Education, 88(3), 397–419CrossRef
  Alexander, R. J. (2008). Toward dialogic teaching: rethinking classroom talk (4th edition). York: Dialogos.
  Alexander, R. (2004). Still no pedagogy? Principle, pragmatism and compliance in primary education. Cambridge Journal Of Education, 34(1), 7–33.
  Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: what research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1–12.CrossRef
  Asay, L., & Orgill, M. (2010). Analysis of essential features of inquiry found in articles published in The Science Teacher, 1998–2007. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(1), 57–79.CrossRef
  Atkin, M., & Black, P. (2003). Inside science education reform: a history of curricular change. New York: Teachers College.
  Banchi, H., & Bell, R. L. (2003). The many levels of inquiry. Science and Children, 46(2), 26–29.
  Beerer, K., & Bodzin, A. (2003). Promoting inuqiry-based science instruction: The validation of the Science Teacher Inquiry Rubric (STIR). Journal of Elementray Science Education, 15(2), 39-49.
  Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A., & Granger, E. M. (2009). No silver bullet for inquiry: making sense of teacher change following an inquiry-based research experience for teachers. Science Education, 93(2), 322–360.CrossRef
  Bybee, R. W. (2004). Scientific inquiry and science teaching. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education (pp. 1–14). Dordrecht: Springer.
  Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815–843.CrossRef
  Chin, C., & Brown, D. E. (2000). Learning deeply in science: an analysis and reintegration of deep approaches in two case studies of grade 8 students. Research in Science Education, 30(2), 173–197.CrossRef
  Crawford, B. A. (2000). Enhancing the essence of inquiry: new roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916–937.CrossRef
  Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613–642.CrossRef
  DeLisi, J., McNeill, K.L., & Minner, D.D. (2011). Illuminating the relationship between inquiry science instruction and student learning: results from three case studies. Paper presented at the 84th Annual Conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Orlando.
  Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. E. (Eds.). (2008). Teaching scientific inquiry: recommendations for research and implementation. Rotterdam: Sense.
  Flick, L. B., & Lederman, N. G. (Eds.). (2004). Scientific inquiry and nature of science: implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
  Ford, M. J., & Wargo, B. M. (2012). Dialogic framing of scientific content for conceptual and epistemic understanding. Science Education, 96(3), 369–391.CrossRef
  Fraser, B. J. (2007). Classroom learning environments. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 103–124). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  Herrenkohl, L. R., Tasker, T., & White, B. (2011). Pedagogical practices to support classroom cultures of scientific inquiry. Cognition and Instruction, 29(1), 1–44.CrossRef
  Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Nagarajan, A., & Day, R. S. (2002). “It’s harder than we thought it would be”: a comparative case study of expert–novice experimentation strategies. Science Education, 86(2), 219–243.CrossRef
  Keys, C. W., & Bryan, L. A. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: essential research for lasting reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 631–645.CrossRef
  Kim, M., Tan, A.-L., & Talaue, F. T. (2013). New vision and challenges in inquiry-based curriculum change in Singapore. International Journal of Science Education, 35(2), 289–311.CrossRef
  Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why mininal gudiance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.
  Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: language, learning and values. Norwood: Alex.
  Lijnse, P. L. (1995). “Developmental research” as a way to an empirically based “didactical structure” of science. Science Education, 79(2), 189–199.CrossRef
  Mercer, N. (2010). The analysis of classroom talk: methods and methodologies. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 1–14.CrossRef
  Mercer, N., & Howe, C. (2012). Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: the value and potential of sociocultural theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), 12–21.CrossRef
  Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: a sociocultural approach. London: Routledge.
  Ministry of Education. (2008). Primary science syllabus. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
  Minner, D. D., & DeLisi, J. (2012). Inquiring into science instruction observation protocol (ISIOP) codebook. Newton: Education Development Center.
  Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction: what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496.CrossRef
  Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classroom. Maidenhead: Open University.
  National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: a guide for teaching and learning. Washington, D.C.: National Academies.
  National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: National Academies.
  Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317–328.CrossRef
  Oliveira, A. W. (2010). Improving teacher questioning in science inquiry discussions through professional development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 422–453.CrossRef
  Peters, E. (2010). Shifting to a student-centered science classroom: an exploration of teacher and student changes in perceptions and practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(3), 329–349.CrossRef
  Poon, C.-L., Lee, Y.-J., Tan, A.-L., & Lim, S. (2012). Knowing inquiry as practice and theory: developing a pedagogical framework with elementary school teachers. Research in Science Education, 42(2), 303–327.CrossRef
  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.CrossRef
  Scott, P. H. (1998). Teacher talk and meaning making in science classrooms: a Vygotskian analysis and review. Studies in Science Education, 32(1), 45–80.CrossRef
  Scott, P. H., Mortimer, E. F., & Aguiar, O. G. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: a fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90(4), 605–631.CrossRef
  Tan, A.-L., & Wong, H.-M. (2012). ‘Didn’t get expected answer, rectify it.’: teaching science content in an elementary science classroom using hands-on activities. International Journal of Science Education, 34(2), 197–222.CrossRef
  van Zee, E. H., Iwasyk, M., Kurose, A., Simpson, D., & Wild, J. (2001). Student and teacher questioning during conversations about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 159–190.
  Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  Wellington, J. (2000). Educational research: contemporary issues and practical approaches. London: Continuum.
  Zhai, J., Jocz, J., & Tan, A.-L. (2014). ‘Am I like a scientist?’: primary children’s images of doing science in school. International Journal of Science Education, 36(4), 553–576.CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Junqing Zhai (1)
  Aik-Ling Tan (2)
  
  1. College of Education, Zhejiang University, 148 Tianmushan Road, Hangzhou, 310028, China
  2. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, 637616, Nanyang, Singapore
  
• 刊物类别：Humanities, Social Sciences and Law
• 刊物主题：Education
  Science Education
  Education
  
• 出版者：Springer Netherlands
• ISSN：1573-1898

文摘

This study delves into the different roles that elementary science teachers play in the classroom to orchestrate science learning opportunities for students. Examining the classroom practices of three elementary science teachers in Singapore, we found that teachers shuttle between four key roles in enabling student learning in science. Teachers can play the role of (1) dispenser of knowledge (giver), (2) mentor of learning (advisor), (3) monitor of students’ activities (police), and (4) partner in inquiry (colearner). These roles are dynamic, and while teachers show a preference for one of the four roles, factors such as the nature of the task, the types of students, as well as the availability of time and resources affect the role that teachers adopt. The roles that teachers play in the classroom have implications for the practice of science as inquiry in the classroom as well as the identities that teachers and students form in the science learning process. Keywords Scientific inquiry Teacher role Classroom discourse Elementary science Teacher-directed Student-directed