Lab work and learning in secondary school chemistry: The importance of teacher and student interaction

Research in Science Education

Volumn 40, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 505-523

  Högström, Per ^a   Ottander, Christina ^a   Benckert, Sylvia ^a  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Case study; Interaction; Lab work; Learning opportunities; Secondary school

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954427655     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-009-9131-3     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Atkinson, M., & Heritage, J. (eds). (1996). Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Bécu-Robinault, K. (2002). Modelling activities of students during a traditional labwork. In D. Psillos & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Teaching and learning in the science laboratory (pp. 51-64). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer.
3. Berry, A., Mulhall, P., Gunstone, R., & Luoghran, J. (1999). Helping students learn from laboratory work. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 45(1), 27-31.
4. Calderhead, J. (1981). Stimulated recall: a method for research on teaching. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 211-217.
5. Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: a theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175-218. doi: 10. 1002/sce. 10001.
6. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.
7. Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72. doi: 10. 1080/03057260208560187.
8. Gunstone, R. F., & Champagne, A. B. (1990). Promoting conceptual change in the laboratory. In E. Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.), The student laboratory and the science curriculum (pp. 159-182). London: Routledge.
9. Gunstone, R., & White, R. T. (2000). Goals, methods and achievements of research in science education. In R. Millar, J. Leach & J. Osborne (Eds.), Improving science education-the contribution of research (pp. 293-307). Bury St Edmunds, GB: Open University Press.
10. Haglund, B. (2003). Stimulated recall-några anteckningar om en metod att generera data. Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige (Journal of Swedish Educational Research), 8(3), 29-35.
11. Hart, C., Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J., & Gunstone, R. (2000). What is the purpose of this experiment? Or can students learn something from doing experiments? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 655-675. doi: 10. 1002/1098-2736(200009)37: 7< 655:: AID-TEA3> 3.0. CO; 2-E.
12. Hodson, D. (1988). Experiments in science and science teaching. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 20(2), 53-66. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1469-5812. 1988. tb00144. x.
13. Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. The School Science Review, 71(256), 33-40.
14. Hodson, D. (1998). Is this really what scientists do? Seeking a more authentic science in and beyond the school laboratory. In J. Wellington (Ed.), Practical work in school science-which way now? (pp. 93-108). Padstow: Routledge.
15. Hodson, D. (2001). What counts as good science education? In D. Hodson (Ed.), OISE papers in the STSE education, volume 2 (pp. 1-21). Toronto: OISE.
16. Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. (2004). The laboratory in science education: foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88, 28-54. doi: 10. 1002/sce. 10106.
17. Högström, P., Ottander, C., & Benckert, S. (2006). Lärares mål med laborativt arbete: utveckla förståelse och intresse. Nordina, 5, 54-66.
18. Högström, P., Ottander, C., & Benckert, S. (2008, March-April). Implementation of objectives for laboratory work in secondary school science. Paper presented at the conference of NARST, Baltimore, US.
19. Jenkins, E. (2006). The student voice and school science education. Studies in Science Education, 42, 49-88. doi: 10. 1080/03057260608560220.
20. Johnstone, A. H., & Al-Shuaili, A. (2001). Learning in the laboratory; some thoughts from the literature. University Chemistry Education, 5, 42-51.
21. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39-103. doi: 10. 1207/s15327809jls0401_2.
22. Kanari, Z., & Millar, R. (2004). Reasoning from data: how students collect and interpret data in science investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(7), 748-769. doi: 10. 1002/tea. 20020.
23. Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
24. Lazarowitz, R., & Tamir, P. (1994). Research on using laboratory instruction in science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 94-130). New York: Macmillan.
25. Lewis, J. (2002). The effectiveness of mini-projects as a preparation for open-ended investigations. In D. Psillos & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Teaching and learning in the science laboratory (pp. 139-150). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer.
26. Lunetta, V. N. (1998). The school science laboratory: Historical perspectives and contexts for contemporary teaching. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 249-262). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer.
27. Lunetta, V. N., Hofstein, A., & Clough, M. P. (2007). Learning and teaching in the school science laboratory: An analysis of research, theory, and practice. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 392-441). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. Millar, R. (2004, June 3). The role of practical work in the teaching and learning of science. Paper presented at the "High School Science Laboratories: Role and Visison" Meeting, Board on Science Education, National Academy of Sciences. Wa.
29. Millar, R., Tiberghien, A., & Le Maréchal, J.-F. (2002). Varieties of lab work: A way of profiling lab work tasks. In D. Psillos & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Teaching and learning in the science laboratory (pp. 9-20). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer.
30. Ottander, C., & Grelsson, G. (2006). Learning outcome and assessment of laboratory work: the teachers' perspective. Journal of Biological Education, 40(3), 113-118.
31. Plowman, L. (1998, March-April). Using video for observation in educational settings. Paper presented at the "British Council Seminar on Research in Education: Metods, Aims and Applications". Edinburgh, GB.
32. Rop, C. J. (1998). Student perspectives on success in high school chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(2), 221-237. doi: 10. 1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199902)36: 2< 221:: AID-TEA7> 3. 0. CO; 2-C.
33. Roth, W.-M. (2005). Talking science: Language and learning in science classrooms. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
34. Roth, W.-M. (2006). Learning science: A singular plural perspective. Rotterdam, NL: Sense.
35. Säljö, R., & Bergqvist, K. (1997). Seeing the light: Discourse and practice in the optics lab. In B. Resnick, R. Säljö, C. Pontecorvo & B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools and reasoning: Essays on situated cognition (pp. 385-405). Berlin: Springer.
36. Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, US: SAGE.
37. Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: in pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 403-418.
38. Welzel, M., Haller, K., Bandiera, M., Hammelev, D., Koumaras, P., Niedderer, H., et al. (1998). Teachers' objectives for lab work. Research tool and cross country results [Working Paper 6]. Retrieved May 15, 2008, from http://www. physik. uni-bremen. de/physics. education/niedderer/projects/labwork/papers. html.
39. White, R. T. (1996). The link between the laboratory and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 18(7), 761-774. doi: 10. 1080/0950069960180703.
40. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research design and methods. Cityplace Thousand Oaks, State California: Sage.