Discourse practices in science learning and teaching

Handbook of Research on Science Education

Volumn 2, Issue , 2014, Pages 321-336

  Kelly, Gregory J ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84939252309     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203097267     Document Type: Chapter

References (110)

1. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Examining the sources for our understandings about science: Enduring conflations and critical issues in research on nature of science in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 353-374.
2. Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2009). A disciplinary discourse perspective on university science learning: Achieving fluency in a critical constellation of modes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 27-49.
3. Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students' argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38, 67-90.
4. Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95, 518-542.
5. 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, 395-427.
6. Ash, D. (2008). Thematic continuities? Talking and thinking about adaptation in a socially complex classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 1-30.
7. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
8. Barton, A. C., & Tan, E. (2009). Funds of knowledge and discourses and hybrid space. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 50-73.
9. Barton, A. C., & Tan, E. (2010). We be burnin'! Agency, identity, and science learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19, 187-229.
10. 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.
11. Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
12. Bellocchi, A., & Ritchie, S. M. (2011). Investigating and theorizing discourse during analogy writing in chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 771-792.
13. Bennett, J., Hogarth, S., Lubben, F., Campbell, B., & Robinson, A. (2010). Talking science: The research evidence on the use of small group discussions in science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 69-95.
14. Berland, L. K., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 68-94.
15. Berland, L. K., & McNeill, K. L. (2010). A learning progression for scientific argumentation: Understanding student work and designing supportive instructional contexts. Science Education, 94, 765-793.
16. Berland, L. K., & McNeill, K. L. (2012). For whom is argument and explanation a necessary distinction? A response to Osborne and Patterson. Science Education, 96, 808-813.
17. Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93, 26-55.
18. Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2011). Classroom communities' adaptations of the practice of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 95, 191-216.
19. Böttcher, F., & Meisert, A. (2011). Argumentation in science education: A model-based framework. Science & Education, 20, 103-140.
20. Bricker, L. A., & Bell, P. (2008). Conceptualizations of argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education. Science Education, 92, 473-498.
21. Brown, B. A. (2006). "It isn't no slang that can be said about this stuff": Language, identity, and appropriating science discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 96-126.
22. Brown, B. A., Reveles, J. M., & Kelly, G. J. (2005). Scientific literacy and discursive identity: A theoretical framework for understanding science learning. Science Education, 89, 779-802.
23. Brown, B. A., & Spang, E. (2008). Double talk: Synthesizing everyday and science language in the classroom. Science Education, 92, 708-732.
24. Cameron, D. (2001). Working with spoken discourse. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25. Carlsen, W. S. (1991). Questioning in classrooms: A sociolinguistic perspective. Review of Educational Research, 61, 157-178.
26. Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument interventions in K-12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80, 336-371.
27. Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms? Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 815-843.
28. Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010a). Journal of the learning supporting argumentation through students' questions: Case studies in science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19, 230-284.
29. Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010b). Students' questions and discursive interaction: Their impact on argumentation during collaborative group discussions in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 883-908.
30. Choi, A., Notebaert, A., Diaz, J., & Hand, B. (2010). Examining arguments generated by year 5, 7, and 10 students in science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 40, 149-169.
31. Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. D. (2007). Personally-seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 253-277.
32. Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. (2008). Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 293-321.
33. Crawford, T. (2005). What counts as knowing: Constructing a communicative repertoire for student demonstration of knowledge in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 139-165.
34. Danish, J. A., & Phelps, D. (2011). Representational practices by the numbers: How kindergarten and first-grade students create, evaluate, and modify their science representations. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 2069-2094.
35. DeWitt, J., & Hohenstein, J. (2010). School trips and classroom lessons: An investigation into teacher-student talk in two settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 454-473.
36. Duran, R. A. (2008). Assessing English-language learners' achievement. Review of Research in Education, 32, 292-327.
37. Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in 3 part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 1-25.
38. Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.). (2008). Argumentation in science education: Recent developments and future directions. New York: Springer.
39. Evagorou, M., Jimenez-Aleixandre, M.-P., & Osborne, J. (2012). "Should we kill the grey squirrels?" A study exploring students' justifications and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 401-428.
40. Eylon, B., Berger, H., & Bagno, E. (2008). An evidence-based continuous professional development programme on knowledge integration in physics: A study of teachers' collective discourse. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 619-641.
41. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Boston: Blackwell Publishing.
42. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.
43. Ford, M. J., & Wargo, B. M. (2012). Dialogic framing of scientific content for conceptual and epistemic understanding. Science Education, 96, 369-391.
44. Gee, J. P. (2001). Literacy, discourse, and linguistics: Introduction and what is literacy? In E. Cushman, E. R. Kintgen, B. M. Kroll, & M. Rose (Eds.), Literacy: A critical sourcebook (pp. 525-544). Boston: Bedford St. Martin's.
45. Gee, J. P., & Green, J. L. (1998). Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice: A methodological study. Review of Research in Education, 23, 119-169.
46. Givry, D., & Roth, W. (2006). Toward a new conception of conceptions? Interplay of talk, gestures, and structures in the setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 1086-1109.
47. Gomes, M. D. C., Mortimer, E. F., & Kelly, G. J. (2011). Contrasting stories of inclusion/exclusion in the chemistry classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 747-772.
48. Gumperz, J. (2001). Interactional sociolingustics: A personal perspective. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 215-228). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
49. Gyllenpalm, J., & Wickman, P. (2011). The uses of the term hypothesis and the inquiry emphasis conflation in science teacher education. Journal of Science Education, 33, 1993-2015.
50. Gyllenpalm, J., Wickman, P.-O., & Holmgren, S.-O. (2010). Teachers' language on scientific inquiry: Methods of teaching or methods of inquiry? International Journal of Science Education, 32, 1151-1172.
51. Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
52. 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, 141-164.
53. Hanrahan, M. U. (2006). Highlighting hybridity: A critical discourse analysis of teacher talk in science classrooms. Science Education, 90, 8-43.
54. Ideland, M., Malmberg, C., & Winberg, M. (2011). Culturally equipped for socio-scientific issues? A comparative study on how teachers and students in mono-and multiethnic schools handle work with complex issues. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 1835-1859.
55. Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20, 591-607.
56. Jaipal, K. (2010). Meaning making through multiple modalities in a biology classroom: A multimodal semiotics discourse analysis. Science Education, 94, 48-72.
57. Jakobsson, A., Mäkitalo, A., & Säljö, R. (2009). Conceptions of knowledge in research on students' understanding of the greenhouse effect: Methodological positions and their consequences for representations and knowing. Science Education, 93, 978-995.
58. Jaworski, A., & Coupland, N. (Eds.). (1999). The discourse reader. New York: Routledge.
59. Kamberelis, G., & Wehunt, M. D. (2012). Hybrid discourse practice and science learning. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7, 505-534.
60. Kelly, G., Regev, J., & Prothero, W. A. (2008). Analysis of lines of reasoning in written argumentation. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Recent developments and future directions (pp. 137-157). New York: Springer.
61. Kelly, G. J. (in press). Inquiry teaching and learning: Philosophical considerations. In M. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching. Springer.
62. Kelly, G. J. (2007). Discourse in science classrooms. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 443-469). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
63. Kelly, G. J. (2008). Inquiry, activity, and epistemic practice. In R. A. Duschl & R. E. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation (pp. 99-117; 288-291). Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
64. Kelly, G. J. (2011). Scientific literacy, discourse, and epistemic practices. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. A. Roberts, P. Wickman, G. Erikson, & A. McKinnon (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 61-73). New York: Routledge.
65. Kelly, G. J. (2012). Developing critical conversations about identity research in science education. In M. Varelas (Ed.), Identity construction and science education research: Learning, teaching, and being in multiple contexts (pp. 185-192). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
66. Kelly, G. J. (2014). Analysing classroom activities: Theoretical and methodological considerations. In C. Bruguière, A. Tiberghien, & P. Clément (Eds.),. Topics and Trends in Current Science Education: 9 th ESERA Conference Selected Contributions (pp. 353-368). Dordrecht: Springer.
67. Kelly, G. J., Carlsen, W. S., & Cunningham, C. M. (1993). Science education in sociocultural context: Perspectives from the sociology of science. Science Education, 77, 207-220.
68. Kelly, G. J., McDonald, S. P., & Wickman, P.-O. (2012). Science learning and epistemology. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 281-291). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
69. Khine, M. S. (Ed.). (2012). Perspectives on scientific argumentation: Theory, practice and research. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
70. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
71. Kolstø, S. D. (2006). Patterns in students' argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 1689-1716.
72. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). An anthropologist visits the laboratory. In B. Latour & S. Woolgard (Eds.), Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts (pp. 43-90). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
73. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
74. Lemke, J. L., Kelly, G. J., & Roth, W.-M. (2006). Forum: Toward a phenomenology of interviews. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1, 83-106.
75. Lidar, M., Almqvist, J., & Östman, L. (2010). A pragmatist approach to meaning making in children's discussions about gravity and the shape of the earth. Science Education, 94, 689-709.
76. Loxley, P. M. (2009). Evaluation of three primary teachers' approaches to teaching scientific concepts in persuasive ways. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 1607-1629.
77. Maeng, S., & Kim, C.-J. (2011). Variations in science teaching modalities and students' pedagogic subject positioning through the discourse register and language code. Science Education, 95, 431-457.
78. Manz, E. (2012). Understanding the codevelopment of modeling practice and ecological knowledge. Science Education, 96, 1071-1105.
79. McDonald, S., & Kelly, G. J. (2012). Beyond argumentation: Sense making discourse in the science classroom. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Perspectives on scientific argumentation: Theory, practice and research (pp. 265-281). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
80. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
81. Mercer, N., Dawes, L., & Staarman, J. K. (2009). Dialogic teaching in the primary science classroom. Language and Education, 23, 353-369.
82. Mikeska, J. N., Anderson, C. W., & Schwarz, C. V. (2009). Principled reasoning about problems of practice. Science Education, 93, 678-686.
83. Mishler, E. G. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
84. Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
85. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
86. National Research Council (NRC). (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
87. Nielsen, J. A. (2012). Science in discussions: An analysis of the use of science content in socioscientific discussions. Science Education, 96, 428-456.
88. Olitsky, S., Flohr, L. L., Gardner, J., & Billups, M. (2010). Coherence, contradiction, and the development of school science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 1209-1228.
89. Oliveira, A. W. (2010). Improving teacher questioning in science inquiry discussions through professional development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 422-453.
90. Oliveira, A. W., Akerson, V. L., Colak, H., Pongsanon, K., & Genel, A. (2012). The implicit communication of nature of science and epistemology during inquiry discussion. Science Education, 96, 652-684.
91. Osborne, J. F., & Patterson, A. (2011). Scientific argument and explanation: A necessary distinction? Science Education, 95, 627-638.
92. Parsons, E., Tran, L. U., & Gomillion, C. T. (2008). An investigation of student roles within small, racially mixed science groups: A racial perspective. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1469-1489.
93. Reveles, J. M., & Brown, B. A. (2008). Contextual shifting: Teachers emphasizing students' academic identity to promote scientific literacy. Science Education, 92, 1015-1041.
94. Russ, R. S., Lee, V. R., & Sherin, B. L. (2012). Framing in cognitive clinical interviews about intuitive science knowledge: Dynamic student understandings of the discourse interaction. Science Education, 96, 573-599.
95. Sadler, T. D. (2006). Promoting discourse and argumentation in science teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 323-346.
96. Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92, 447-472.
97. Schwab, J. (1960). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. Schwab & P. Brandwein (Eds.), The teaching of science (pp. 3-103). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
98. Shaw, J. M., Bunch, G. C., & Geaney, E. R. (2010). Analyzing language demands facing English learners on science performance assessments: The SALD framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 909-928.
99. Siry, C., Ziegler, G., & Max, C. (2012). "Doing science" through discoursein-interaction: Young children's science investigations at the early childhood level. Science Education, 96, 311-326.
100. Tang, X., Coffey, J. E., Elby, A., & Levin, D. M. (2010). The scientific method and scientific inquiry: Tensions in teaching and learning. Science Education, 94, 29-47.
101. Varelas, M. (Ed.). (2012). Identity construction and science education research: Learning, teaching, and being in multiple contexts. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
102. Varelas, M., Kane, J. M., & Wylie, C. D. (2012). Young Black children and science: Chronotopes of narratives around their science journals. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 568-596.
103. Varelas, M., Pappas, C. C., Kane, J. M., Arsenault, A., Hankes, J., & Cowan, B. M. (2008). Urban primary-grade children think and talk science: Curricular and instructional practices that nurture participation and argumentation. Science Education, 92, 65-95.
104. von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., Simon, S., Education, P., & Giessen, J. (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, 101-131.
105. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
106. Walker, K. A., & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1387-1410.
107. Wickman, P. O., & Östman, L. (2002). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86, 601-623.
108. Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008). How novice science teachers appropriate epistemic discourses around model-based inquiry for use in classrooms. Cognition & Instruction, 26, 310-376.
109. Zembal-Saul, C. (2009). Learning to teach elementary school science as argument. Science Education, 93, 687-719.
110. Zimmerman, H. T., Reeve, S., & Bell, P. (2010). Family sense-making practices in science center conversations. Science Education, 94, 478-505.