'It's Her Body'. When Students' Argumentation Shows Displacement of Content in a Science Classroom

Research in Science Education

Volumn 42, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1121-1145

  Orlander Arvola, Auli ^a   Lundegård, Iann ^a  

^a STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Conflict of interest; Continuity; Deliberative educational questions; Displacement; Science education; Tension

Indexed keywords

EID: 84868495718     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-011-9237-2     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Andrews, R. (2005). Models of argumentation in educational discourse. Text, 25(1), 107-127.
2. Andrews, R., & Hertzberg, F. Y. (2009). Introduction: Special issue on argumentation in education in Scandinavia and England. Argumentation, 23(4), 433-436.
3. Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87(3), 352.
4. Berner, B., & Nyborg, M. (2004). Ifrågasättanden: Forskning om genus, teknik och naturvetenskap. Linköping: Tema Teknik och social förändring, Linköpings universitet.
5. Biesta, G. (1994). Pragmatism as a pedagogy of communicative action. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 13(3/4), 273.
6. Biesta, G. (2001). "Preparing for the incalculable". Deconstruction, justice and the question of education. In G. J. J. Biesta & D. Egéa-Kuehne (Eds.), Derrida & education (pp. 32-54). London: Routledge.
7. Biesta, G. (2004). The community of those who have nothing in common: Education and the language of responsibility. Interchange, 35(3), 307-324.
8. Biesta, G. (2006). Beyond learning: Democratic education for a human future. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.
9. Biesta, G., & Burbules, N. C. (2003). Pragmatism and educational research. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
10. Biesta, G. J. J., & Egéa-Kuehne, D. (2001). Derrida & education. London: Routledge.
11. Brickhouse, N. W. (2001). Embodying science: A feminist perspective on learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 282-295.
12. Dewey, J. (1916/1999). Demokrati och utbildning [Democracy and Education] (N. Sjöden, Trans.). Göteborg: Daidalos.
13. Dewey, J. (1922/1996). Human Nature & Conduct in L. Hickman (Ed.), Collected works of John Dewey, 1882-1953: The electronic edition (Middle Works) (Vol. 14). Charlottenwille: InteLex Corporation.
14. Dewey, J. (1925/1996). Experience and Nature. In L. Hickman (Ed.), Collected works of John Dewey, 1882-1953: The electronic edition (Late Works) (Vol. 1): VA: InteLex Corporation.
15. Dewey, J. (1938/1996). Experience and education. In L. Hickman (Ed.), Collected works of John Dewey, 1882-1953: The electronic edition (Late Works) ([New ed., p. 91). New York: InteLex Corporation.
16. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287.
17. Ekborg, M., Ideland, M., & Malmberg, C. (2009). Science for all-a conceptual framework for construction and analysis of socio-scientific cases. Nordina, 5(1), 35-46.
18. Englund, T. (2006). Deliberative communication: A pragmatist proposal. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(5), 503-520.
19. Erduran, S., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2008). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer.
20. Foucault, M., Rabinow, P., & Faubion, J. D. (1998). Essential works of Foucault, 1954-1984 (Vol. 2, Aesthetics, method and epistemology. New York). London: New Press; Allen Lane.
21. Gosselin, C. (2003). In a different voice and the transformative experience: A Deweyan perspective. Educational Theory, 53(1), 91.
22. Grace, M. M., & Ratcliffe, M. (2002). The science and values that young people draw upon to make decisions about biological conservation issues. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1157-1169.
23. Hamza, K. M., & Wickman, P.-O. (2008). Describing and analyzing learning in action: An empirical study of the importance of misconceptions in learning science. Science Education, 92(1), 141-164.
24. Harding, S. G. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge?: Thinking from women's lives. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
25. Hodkinson, P., Biesta, G., & James, D. (2008). Understanding learning culturally: Overcoming the dualism between social and individual views of learning. Vocations and Learning, 1(1), 27-47.
26. Hughes, G. (2000). Marginalization of socioscientific material in science-technology-society science curricula: Some implications for gender inclusivity and curriculum reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 426-440.
27. Jakobson, B., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007). Transformation through language use: Childrens spontaneous metaphors in elementary school science. Science & Education, 16(3-5), 267-289.
28. Kolstø, S. D., Bungum, B., Arnesen, E., Isnes, A., Kristensen, T., Mathiassen, K., et al. (2006). Patterns in students' argumentation Confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1689-1716.
29. Krupnick, M. (1983). Displacement: Derrida and after. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
30. Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy with/in the postmodern. New York: Routledge.
31. Lawson, A. (2003). The nature and development of hypothetico-predictive argumentation with implications for science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1387-1408.
32. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Westport: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
33. Lundegård, I. (2008). Self, values and the world-Young people in dialogue on sustainable development. In J. Öhman (Ed.), Values and democracy in education for sustainable development: Contributions from Swedish research (pp. 123-144). Sweden: Liber.
34. Lundegård, I., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007). Conflicts of interest: An indispensable element of education for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 13(1), 1-15.
35. Lundegård, I., & Wickman, P.-O. (2009). Identity transformation in education for sustainable development: A question of location. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 53(5), 461-479.
36. Lundin, M. (2007). Questions as a tool for bridging science and everyday language games. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2, 265-279.
37. Lundström, M. (2005). Organdonation och transplantation-ett ämne för skolan? [Organ donation and transplantation-a subject in school?]. Malmö: Malmö högskola.
38. National Agency for Education (2006). Curriculum for the compulsory school system, the pre-school class and the leisure-time centre. Lpo 94 Swedish ministry of education and science [Utbildningsdep.].
39. Nyström, E. (2007). Talking and taking positions. An encounter between action research and the gendered and racialised discourse of school science. Umeå: Umeå University.
40. Östman, L. (1998). How meanings are expressed by science education discourse. In D. A. Roberts & L. Östman (Eds.), Problems of meaning in science curriculum. New York: Teacher College Press.
41. Östman, L. (2008). Analys av utbildningens diskursivitet. Utbildning & Demokrati, 17(3), 113-137.
42. Roberts, D. A. (1982). The place of qualitative research in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19(4), 277-292.
43. Rorty, R. (1991). Philosophical papers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44. Ryder, J. (2001). Identifying science understanding for functional scientific literacy. Studies in Science Education, 36(1), 1-44.
45. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
46. Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463-1488.
47. Sadler, T., Chambers, W., & Zeidler, D. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387-409.
48. Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students' scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5-51.
49. Sandoval, W., & Millwood, K. (2008). What can argumentation tell us about epistemology? In S. Erduran & M. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education. Dordrecht: Springer.
50. Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4-13.
51. Simon, S., & Richardson, K. (2009). Argumentation in school science: Breaking the tradition of authoritative exposition through a pedagogy that promotes discussion and reasoning. Argumentation, 23(4), 469-493.
52. Sjøberg, S. (2005). Naturvetenskap som allmänbildning: en kritisk ämnesdidaktik (2., rev. uppl./ed.). Lund: Studentlitteratur.
53. Sullivan, S. (2001). Living across and through skins: Transactional bodies, pragmatism and feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
54. Swedish Research Council, V. (2002). Forskningsetiska principer inom humanistisk-samhällsvetenskaplig forskning. Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet.
55. Tiberghien, A. (2008). Foreword in Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (Vol. Science & Technology Education Library; 35). Dordrecht: Springer.
56. Todd, S. (2003). Learning from the other: Levinas, psychoanalysis, and ethical possibilities in education. Albany: State University of New York Press.
57. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
58. Wickman, P. O. (2004). The practical epistemologies of the classroom: A study of laboratory work. Science Education, 88(3), 325-344.
59. Wickman, P. O. (2006). Aesthetic experience in science education: Learning and meaning-making as situated talk and action. USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
60. Wickman, P. O. & Östman, L. (2002). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Eduction, 86(5), 601-603.
61. Wittgenstein, L. (1992a). Filosofiska undersökningar [Philosphische Untersuchungen/Philosofical Investigations] (A. Wedberg, Trans. Ny uppl./ed.). Stockholm: Thales.
62. Wittgenstein, L. (1992b). Om visshet [Über gewissheit/On Certainty] (L. Hertzberg, Trans. [Ny utg.] ed.). Stockholm: Thales.
63. Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A., & Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86(3), 343-367.