Science through Drama: A multiple case exploration of the characteristics of drama activities used in secondary science lessons

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 31, Issue 16, 2009, Pages 2247-2270

  Dorion, Kirk Robert ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Drama; Learning activities; Model based learning; Physical simulation; Role play; Science education; Secondary school; Visualisation

Indexed keywords

EID: 77649113773     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690802712699     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Ametller, J., Leach, J., & Scott, P. (2007). Using perspectives on subject learning to inform the design of subject teaching: An example from science education. Curriculum Journal, 18(4), 479-492.
2. Anderson, C. (2004). Learning in "as-if" worlds: Cognition in drama in education. Theory into Practice, 43(4), 281-286.
3. Aubusson, P. J., & Fogwill, S. (2006). Role play as analogical modelling in science. In P. J. Aubusson, A. G. Harrison, & S. M. Ritchie (Eds.), Metaphor and analogy in science education (Vol. 30, pp. 93-104). Dordrecht: Springer.
4. Aubusson, P. J., Fogwill, S., Barr, R., & Perkovic, L. (1997). What happens when students do simulation role play in science? Research in Science Education, 27(4), 565-579.
5. Bakhtin, M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky's poetics. In C. Emerson (Ed.), Theory and history of literature (Vol. 8, pp. 5-46). London: University of Minnesota Press.
6. Bolton, G. (1980). Theatre form in drama teaching. London: Heinemann.
7. Bolton, G. (1985). Changes in thinking about drama in education. Theory into Practice, 24(3), 151-157.
8. Bowell, P., & Heap, B. S. (2001). Planning process drama. London: David Fulton.
9. Bresler, L. (Ed.). (2004). Knowing bodies, moving minds: Towards embodied teaching and learning. Amsterdam: Kluwer.
10. Brown, C. R. (1995). The effective teaching of biology. London: Longman.
11. Claxton, G. (1997). Science of the times: A 2020 vision of education. In R. Levinson & J. Thomas (Eds.), Science today: Problem or crisis? London: Routledge.
12. Cohen, L., Manion, K., & Morrison, L. (2000). Research methods in education. London: Routledge-Falmer.
13. Conard, F. (1998). Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of creative drama. In B. J. Wagner (Ed.), Educational drama and language arts (pp. 199-211). Chicago, IL: Heinemann.
14. Counsell, C. (2001). Signs of performance: An introduction to twentieth century theatre. London: Routledge.
15. Courtney, R. (1974). Play, drama and thought: The intellectual background to drama in education. London: Cassell & Collier Macmillan.
16. DfES. (2006). Unit 9I: Energy and electricity. Science at Key Stage 3: Schemes of work. Retrieved February11,2009, from http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/schemes2/secondary_science/sci09i/09iq2c?view=get
17. Dorion, C. (2005, April 22). Miming molecules. TES Teacher, pp. 20-21.
18. Dorion, C. (2007). Science through drama: A multiple case exploration of the characteristics of drama activities in secondary science lessons. Masters thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
19. Duveen, J., & Solomon, J. (1994). The great evolution trial: Use of role-play in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(5), 575-582.
20. Edmiston, B., & Wilhelm, J. D. (1998). Repositioning views/reviewing positions. In B. J. Wagner (Ed.), Educational drama and language arts: What research shows (pp. 90-117). Chicago, IL: Heinemann.
21. Ellington, H. I., Addinall, E., & Percival, F. (1981). Games and simulations in science education. London: Kogan Page.
22. Gentner, D., Holyoak, K. J., & Kokinov, B. N. (2001). The analogical mind: Perspectives from cogni-tive science. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.
23. Georgiou, A. (2005). Thought experiments in physics problem-solving: On intuition and imagistic simulation. Masters thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
24. Gilbert, J. K. (2005). Constructing worlds through science education: The selected works of John K. Gilbert. London: Routledge.
25. Goswami, U. (1992). Analogical reasoning in children. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26. Hargreaves, L. (2006). Research methods in education. Cambridge: Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge.
27. Harvard-Project-Zero.(2001). The arts academic improvement: What the evidence shows. Translations: From Theory to Practice, 10(1): 1-3.
28. Heathcote, D. (1991). Collected writing on education and drama. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
29. Heywood, D. (2002). The place of analogies in science education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 233-247.
30. Hornbrook, D. (1998). Education and dramatic art. London: Routledge.
31. Ihde, D. (2002). Bodies in technology: Electronic meditations (Vol. 5). London: University of Minnesota Press.
32. Jaques, D. (2000). Learning in groups: A handbook for improving group work. London: Routledge-Falmer.
33. Johnson, G. (1999). Kidney role-plays. School Science Review, 80(292), 93-97.
34. Jones, K. (1995). Simulations: A handbook for teachers and trainers. London: Kogan Page.
35. Jones, S., & Tanner, H. (2006). Assessment: A practical guide for secondary teachers. London: Continuum.
36. Kress, G., Jewitt, C., & Ogborn, J. (2001). The rhetorics of the science classroom: A multimodal approach. London: Cassell.
37. Kress, G., & Leeuwen, T. V. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Arnold.
38. Loi, D., & Dillon, P. (2006). Adaptive educational environments as creative spaces. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(3), 363-381.
39. Lyle, J. (2003). Stimulated recall: A report on its use in naturalistic research. BERA Educational Research Journal, 29(6), 861-878.
40. Lytle, D. E. (2003). Play and educational theory and practice. London: Paeger.
41. McSharry, G., & Jones, S. (2000). Role play in science teaching and learning. School Science Review, 82(298), 73-82.
42. Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children's thinking. Abingdon: Routledge.
43. Metcalfe, R. J. A., Abbot, S., Bray, P., Exley, J., & Wisnia, D. (1984). Teaching science through drama: An empirical investigation. Research in Science & Technological Education, 2(1), 77-81.
44. Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Making meaning in secondary science classrooms. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
45. Neelands, J. (1984). Making sense of drama: A guide to classroom practice. Oxford: Heinemann.
46. Odegaard, M. (2003). Dramatic science: A critical review of drama in science education. Studies in Science Education, 39, 75-102.
47. O'Toole, J. (1992). The process of drama: Negotiating art and meaning. London: Routledge.
48. Reiner, M., & Gilbert, J. (2000). Epistemological resources for thought experimentation in science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 22(5), 489-506.
49. SATIS. (1986). The Limestone Inquiry. Hatfield: Association for Science Education.
50. Scott, P., Mortimer, E., & Aguiar, O. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90, 605-631.
51. Simpson, M., & Tuson, J. (2003). Using observations in small-scale research. Edinburgh: SCRE.
52. Solomon, J. (1983). Learning about energy: How pupils think in two domains. International Journal of Science Education, 5(1), 49-59.
53. Solomon, J. (1990). The retrial of Galileo (SATIS 16-19, Unit 1, pp. 1-4). Hatfield: Association for Science Education.
54. Somers, J. (1994). Drama in the curriculum. London: Cassell Education.
55. Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. London: Guilford.
56. Stebbins, R. A. (2001). Exploratory research in the social sciences. London: Sage.
57. Theile, R., & Treagust, D. (1994). An interpretive examination of high school chemistry: Teachers' analogical explanations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(3), 227-242.
58. Tvieta, J. (1993). Helping middle school students to learn the kinetic particle model: Proceedings of the 3rd international seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
59. Tvieta, J. (1996, August). The drama model of electricity. Paper presented at the 8th Sympo-sium of International Organization of Science and Technology Education, Edmonton, Canada.
60. Tvieta, J. (1997). Constructivistic teaching methods helping students to develop particle models in science. From misconceptions to constructed understanding: The 4th international seminar on Misconceptions Research. Santa Cruz, CA: The Meaningful Learning Research Group.
61. Wagner, B. J. (1998). Educational drama and language arts: What research shows. Chicago, IL: Heinemann.
62. Wilhelm, J., & Edmiston, B. (1998). Imagining to learn: Inquiry, ethics, and integration through drama. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
63. Wilson, E., & Spink, A. (2005). Making meaning in chemistry lessons. Electronic Journal of Literacy through Science, 4(2). Retrieved February11,2009, from http://ejlts.ucdavis.edu/current_issue/articles/wilson.pdf