Power Dynamics and Questioning in Elementary Science Classrooms

Journal of Science Teacher Education

Volumn 23, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 745-768

  Reinsvold, Lori A ^a   Cochran, Kathryn F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

Discourse; Power; Questioning; Subject matter

Indexed keywords

EID: 84869100502     PISSN: 1046560X     EISSN: 15731847     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10972-011-9235-2     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Adger, C. T. (2003). Discourse in educational settings. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
2. Bianchini, J. A. (1997). Where knowledge construction, equity, and context intersect: Student learning of science in small groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(10), 1039-1065.
3. Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Scotter, P. V., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., et al. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: origins, effectiveness, and applications (pp. 1-19). Colorado Springs: Biological Science Curriculum Studies.
4. Candela, A. (1999). Students' power in classroom discourse. Linguistics and Education, 10(2), 139-163.
5. Candela, A. (2005). Students' participation as co-authoring of school institutional practices. Culture and Psychology, 11(3), 321-337.
6. Cazden, C. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
7. Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815-843.
8. Cornelius, L. L., & Herrenkohl, L. R. (2004). Power in the classroom: How the classroom environment shapes students' relationships with each other and with concepts. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 467-498.
9. Creswell, J. W. (Ed.). (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design, choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10. Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (2006). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
11. Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. T. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 399-484.
12. Erdogan, I., & Campbell, T. (2008). Teacher questioning and interaction patterns in classrooms facilitated with differing levels of constructivist teaching practices. International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1-24.
13. Fairclough, N. L. (1989). Language and power. London: Longman.
14. Glen, N., & Dotger, S. (2009). Elementary teachers' use of language to label and interpret science concepts. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(4), 71-83.
15. Gore, J. M. (2002). Some certainties in the uncertain world of classroom practice: An outline of a theory of power relations in pedagogy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Education.
16. Graesser, A. C., & Person, N. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 104-137.
17. Halliday, M. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Arnold.
18. Kelly, G. J. (2007). Discourse in science classrooms. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19. Kelly, G. J., & Brown, C. (2003). Communicative demands of learning science through technological design: Third grade students' construction of solar energy devices. Linguistics and Education, 13(4), 483-532.
20. King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338-368.
21. Lave, J., & Wenger, W. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22. Lemke, J. L. (1989). Making text talk. Theory into practice, 28(2).
23. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language learning, and values. Westport, CN: Ablex Publishing.
24. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25. Moje, E., Collazo, T., Carillo, R., & Marx, R. (2001). Maestro what is 'quality?': Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 469-498.
26. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
27. Redfield, D. L., & Rousseau, E. W. (1981). A meta-analysis of experimental research on teacher questioning behavior. Review of Educational Research, 51(2), 237-245.
28. Roth, W. M. (1996). Teacher questioning in an open-inquiry learning environment: Interactions of context, content, and student responses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(7), 709-736.
29. Roth, W. M., & Lucas, K. B. (1997). From "truth" to "invented reality": A discourse analysis of high school physics students' talk about scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 145-179.
30. Roychoudhury, A., & Roth, W. M. (1996). Interactions in an open-inquiry physics laboratory. International Journal of Science Education, 18(4), 423-445.
31. 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.
32. Shepardson, D. P., & Britsch, S. J. (2006). Zones of interaction: Differential access to elementary science discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(5), 443-466.
33. Smith, J. P., diSessa, A., & Roschelle, J. (1993/1994). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 115-163.
34. The Regents of the University of California. (2005). Full option science system (FOSS). Nashua, NH: Delta Education.
35. Tobin, K., Briscoe, C., & Holman, J. R. (1990). Overcoming constraints to effective elementary science teaching. Science Education, 74, 409-420.
36. Tobin, K., & Tippins, D. (1993). Constructivism as a referent for teaching and learning. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The Practice of constructivism in science education. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
37. van Dijk, T. A. (1996). Discourse, power and access. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Texts and practices: Readings in critical discourse analysis. London: Routledge.
38. van Dijk, T. A. (2003). Critical discourse analysis. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
39. van Zee, E. H., Iwasyk, M., Kurose, A., Simpson, D., & Wild, J. (2001). Student and teacher questioning during conversations about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 159-190.
40. van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997). Reflective discourse: Developing shared understandings in a physics classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 209-228.
41. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42. Wang, J. (2006). Questions and the exercise of power. Discourse and Society, 17(4), 529-548.
43. Wells, G. (1999). Putting a tool to different uses: A reevaluation of the IRF sequence. In G. Wells (Ed.), Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge: University Press.
44. Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.