An analysis of the supports and constraints for scientific discussion in high school project-based science

Science Education

Volumn 94, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 395-427

  Alozie, Nonye M ^a   Moje, Elizabeth Birr ^a   Krajcik, Joseph S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954628141     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20365     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Alvermann, D.E., Dillon, D.R., & O'Brien, D.G. (1987). Discussion strategies for content area reading. In D.E. Alvermann, D.R. Dillon, & D. G. O'Brien (Eds.), Using discussion to promote reading comprehension. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
3. Ball, D.L., & Cohen, D.K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is: Or what might be: The role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6-8, 14.
4. Barron, B.J.S., Schwartz, D.L., Vye, N.J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., et al. (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problemand project-based learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3-4), 271-311.
5. Barton, A.C., Tan, E., & Rivet, A. (2008). Creating hybrid spaces for engaging school science among urban middle school girls. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 68-103.
6. Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., & Harris, C. (2006). Learning environments (Vol. 4). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
7. Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R.W., Patrick, H., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1997). Teaching for understanding. In B.J. Biddle (Ed.), International handbook of teachers and teaching (pp. 819-878). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
8. Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., Marx, R., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3/4), 369-398.
9. Candela, A. (1999). Students' power in classroom discourse. Linguistics and Education, 10(2), 139-163.
10. Caravita, S., & Hallden, O. (1994). Reframing the problem of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 89-111.
11. Cartier, J.L., & Stewart, J. (2000). Teaching the nature of inquiry: Further developments in a high school genetics curriculum. Science and Education, 9(3), 247-267.
12. Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815-843.
13. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13.
14. Crawford, T., Kelly, G.J., & Brown, C. (2000). Ways of knowing beyond facts and laws of science: An ethnographic investigation of student engagement in scientific practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(3), 237-258.
15. Davis, E., & Krajcik, J. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3-14.
16. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119-161). New York: MacMillan Press.
17. Fernandez, C., & Yoshida, M. (2004). Lesson study: A Japanese approach to improving mathematics teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Fishman, B., & Davis, E.A. (2006). Teacher learning research and the learning sciences. In R.K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of learning sciences (pp. 535-550). New York: Cambridge University Press.
19. Gee, J.P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). London: Falmer.
20. Goodlad, J.I. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future. New York: McGraw-Hill.
21. Greeno, J., & Middle School Mathematics Through Applications Project Group. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5-26.
22. Hadjioannou, X. (2007). Bringing the background to the foreground: What do classroom environments that support authentic discussions look like? American Educational Research Journal, 44(2), 370-399.
23. Hilton-Brown, B.A. (2004). Discursive identity: Assimilation into the culture of science and its implication for minority students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(8), 810-834.
24. Jimenez-Aleiandre, M.P., Rodriguez, A.B., & Duschl, R. (2000). "Doing the science lesson" or "doing science" : Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-792.
25. Kelly, G., & Green, J. (1998). The social nature of knowing: Toward a sociocultural perspective on conceptual change and knowledge construction. In B. Guzzetti & C. Hynd (Eds.), Perspectives on conceptual change: Multiple ways to understand knowing and learning in a complex world. London: Routledge.
26. Kesidou, S., & Roseman, J.E. (2002). How well do middle school science programs measure up? Findings from Project 2061's curriculum review. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 522-549.
27. Krajcik, J., & Blumenfeld, P. (2006). Project-based learning. In R.K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 317-334). New York: Cambridge University Press.
28. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R.W., Bass, K.M., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Attempts by middle school students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3/4), 313-350.
29. Krajcik, J., Czerniak, C.M., & Berger, C.F. (2002). Teaching science in elementary and middle school classrooms: A project based approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.
30. Kuhn, L., Kenyon, K.O., & Reiser, B.J. (2006). Fostering scientific argumentation by creating a need for students to attend to each other's claims and evidence. Paper presented at International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS), Bloomington, IN.
31. Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
32. Lynch, S. (2000). Equity and science education reform. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
33. Magnusson, S., Palincsar, A.S., & Templin, M. (2004). Community, culture, and conversation in inquiry-based science instruction. In L.B. Flick & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science (pp. 131155). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
34. McNeill, K., Lizotte, D.J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191.
35. Mehan, H. (1978). Structuring school structure. Harvard Educational Review, 48(1), 32-64.
36. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37. Moje, E., Collazo, T., Carillo, R., & Marx, R.W. (2001). "Maestro, what is 'quality'?" : Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(4), 469-498.
38. Moje, E.B. (1997). Exploring discourse, subjectivity, and knowledge in chemistry class. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 32, 35-44.
39. Moje, E.B. (2002). But where are the youth: Integrating youth culture into literacy theory. Educational Theory, 52, 97-120.
40. Moje, E.B., Ciechanowski, K.M., Kramer, K.E., Ellis, L.M., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), 38-71.
41. Moje, E.B., & Speyer, J. (2008). The reality of challenging texts in high school science and social studies: How teachers can mediate comprehension. In K. Hinchman & H. Thomas (Eds.), Best practices in adolescent literacy instruction (pp. 185-211). New York: Guilford Press.
42. Nassaji, H., & Wells, G. (2000). What's the use of 'triadic dialogue'?: An investigation of teacher-student interaction. Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 376-406.
43. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
44. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
45. O'Brien, D.G., Stewart, R.A., & Moje, E.B. (1995). Why content literacy is difficult to infuse into the secondary school: Complexities of curriculum, pedagogy, and school culture. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 442-463.
46. Penuel, W., Fishman, B., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. (2007). What make professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921-958.
47. Polman, J.L. (2000). Designing project-based science: Connecting learning through guided inquiry. New York: Teachers College Press.
48. Polman, J.L. (2004). Dialogic activity structures for project-based learning environments. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 431-466.
49. Powell, A.G., Farrar, E., & Cohen, D.K. (1985). The shopping mall high school: Winners and losers in the educational marketplace. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
50. Putnam, R., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4-15.
51. Remillard, J.T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211-246.
52. 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.
53. Shavelson, R.J., Phillips, D.C., Towne, L., & Feuer, M.J. (2003). On the science of education design studies. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 23-28.
54. Singer, J., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J., & Chambers, J.C. (2000). Constructing extended inquiry projects: Curriculum materials for science education reform. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 165-178.
55. Sizer, T.R. (1984). Horace's compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
56. (in press). Solomon, T.C., van Der Kerkhof, M., & Moje, E.B. (in press). When is a detail seductive? Examining text and the role of interest in middle-school students, scientific literacy development. In A. Rodriguez (Ed.), Science education as a pathway to teaching language literacy. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
57. Stake, R.E., & Easley, J. (1978). Case studies in science education. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois.
58. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Procedures and techniques for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
59. Tharp, R., & Gallimore, R. (1991). The instruction conversation: Teaching and learning in social activity. Santa Cruz, CA: National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.
60. Tsui, C.-Y., & Treagust, D.F. (2006). Understanding genetics: Analysis of secondary students conceptual status. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 205-235.
61. Vacca, R.T., & Vacca, J. (2004). Content area reading: Literacy and learning across the curriculum (8th ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon.
62. Vygotsky, L.S. (1986). Thought and language (A. Kozulin, Trans.). Cambridge: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
63. Wells, G., & Mejia-Arauz, R. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom; Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379-428.
64. Wertsch, J.V. (1995). The need for action in scoiocultural research. In J.V. Wertsch, P. DelRio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 56-74). New York: Cambridge University Press.