Dialogic framing of scientific content for conceptual and epistemic understanding

Science Education

Volumn 96, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 369-391

  Ford, Michael J ^a   Wargo, Brian M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859741892     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20482     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Aguilar, O. G., Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2010). Learning from and responding to students' questions: The authoritative and dialogic tension. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 174-193.
2. Alexander, R. J. (2008). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (4th ed.). Thirsk, England: Dialogos.
3. Alozie, N. M., Moje, E. B., & Krajcik, J. S. (2010). An analysis of the supports and constraints for scientific discussion in high school project-based science. Science Education, 94(3), 395-427.
4. Andriessen, J. (2006). Arguing to learn. In R. K. Sawyer, (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 443-459). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
5. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
6. Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (V. W. McGee, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
7. Bateson, G. (1972). A theory of play and fantasy. In G. Bateson, (Ed.), Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution and epistemology (pp. 177-193). San Francisco: Chandler.
8. Brewer, W. F., Chinn, C. A., & Samarapungavan, A. (2000). Explanation in scientists and children. In F. C. Keil & R. A. Wilson, (Eds.). Explanation and cognition (pp. 279-298). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
10. Carpenter, T. P., & Lehrer, R. (1999). Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. In E. Fennema & T. A. Romberg, (Eds.). Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 3-17). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
12. Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72.
13. Engle, R. A. (2006). Framing interactions to foster generative learning: A situative explanation of transfer in a community of learners classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(4), 451-498.
14. Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 399-483.
15. Forman, E. A., & Ford, M. J. (2011). The role of dialogic discussion in fostering a learning progression for scientific argumentation. Paper presented at the Triennial International Congress of the International Society for Cultural and Activity Research, Rome, Italy.
16. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row.
17. Hammer, D., Elby, A., Scherr, R. E., & Redish, E. F. (2005). Resources, framing and transfer. In J. Mestre, (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 89-120). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
18. Herrenkohl, L. R., & Guerra, M. R. (1998). Participant structures, scientific discourse, and student discourse in fourth grade. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 431-473.
19. Hogan, K., & Corey, C. (2001). Viewing classrooms as cultural contexts for fostering scientific literacy. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 32(2), 214-243.
20. Holquist, M. (2002). Dialogism: Bakhtin and his world. New York: Routledge.
21. Hutchison, P., & Hammer, D. (2010). Attending to student epistemological framing in a science classroom. Science Education, 94(3), 506-524.
22. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). "Doing the lesson" or "doing science": Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84, 757-792.
23. Keil, F. C. (2006). Explanation and understanding. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 227-254.
24. Kelly, G. J., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86, 314-342.
25. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319-337.
26. Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
28. Longino, H. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
29. Matusov, E. (2009). Journey into dialogic pedagogy. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
30. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31. Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
32. Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classroom. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
33. O'Connor, C., & Michaels, S. (2007). When is dialogue "dialogic"? Human Development, 50, 275-285.
34. Osborne, J. F., & Patterson, A. (2011). Scientific argument and explanation: A necessary distinction? Science Education, 95(4), 627-638.
35. Passmore, C., & Stewart, J. (2002). A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 185-204.
36. Pera, M. (1994). The discourses of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37. Rogoff, B., & Wertsch, J. V. (1984). Children's learning in the "zone of proximal development". San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
38. Scott, P., Mortimer, E. F., & Aguilar, 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, 605-631.
39. Stewart, J., Cartier, J. L., & Passmore, C. (2005). Developing understanding through model-based inquiry. In M. S. Donovan & J. D. Bransford, (Eds.). How students learn: Science in the classroom (pp. 515-565). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
40. Stone, C. A. (1998). The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 344-364.
41. Tannen, D. (1993). Introduction. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Framing in discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
42. von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students' argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131.
43. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
44. Wells, G. (Ed.). (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
45. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
46. Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
47. Wiske, M. S. (Ed.). (1998). Teaching for understanding: Linking research with practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
48. Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Allied Disciplines, 17, 89-100.