Talk as a tool for thinking: Using professional discourse practices to frame children’s design-technology talk

Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 331-351

  Gustafson, Brenda J ^a   MacDonald, Dougal ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011436508     PISSN: 14926156     EISSN: 19424051     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14926150409556618     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Alpert, B.R. (1987). Active, silent and controlled discussion: Explaining variations in classroom conversation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3, 29-40.
2. Aiming, A. (1997). Teaching and learning how to design in schools. Journal of Design and Technology Education, 2(1), 50-52.
3. Appleton, K. (1997). Teaching science: Exploring the issues. Rockhampton, Queensland: Central Queensland University Press.
4. Barlex, D. (1991). Using science in design and technology. Design and Technology Education, 23(3), 148-151.
5. Bames, D., & Todd, F. (1995). Communication through learning revisited: Making meaning through talk. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton Cook.
6. Bennett, N., & Dunne, E. (1991). The nature and quality of talk in cooperative classroom groups. Learning and Instruction, I, 103-118.
7. Berger, P.L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. New York: Doubleday.
8. Bratman, M. (1983). Taking plans seriously. Social Theory and Practice, 9(2-3), 271-287.
9. Bratman, M.E. (1987). Intention, plans and practical reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10. Bruner, J.S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11. Bucciarelli, L.L. (1988). An ethnographic perspective on engineering design. Design Studies, 9(3), 159-168.
12. Bucciarelli, L.L. (1994). Designing engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13. Carlsen, W.S. (1991). Questioning in classrooms: A sociolinguistic perspective. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 157-178.
14. Cowan, J. (1983). How engineers understand: An experiment for author and reader. Engineering Education, 75(4), 301-304.
15. Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49-55.
16. Cross, N., & Cross, A.C. (1998). Expertise in engineering design. Research in Engineering Design, 10, 141-149.
17. Darke, J. (1979). The primary generator and the design process. Design Studies, 1(1), 36-44.
18. Davies, D. (1996). Professional design and primary children. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 6(1), 45-59.
19. Davies, D. (1997). The relationship between science and technology in the primary curriculum: Alternative perspectives. Journal of Design and Technology Education, 2(2), 101-111.
20. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London: Methuen.
22. Erickson, F. (1982). Classroom discourse as improvisation: Relationships between academic task structure and social participation structure in lessons. In L.C. Wilkinson (Ed.), Communicating in the classroom (pp. 153-181). New York: Academic Press.
23. Fensham, P.J. (1990). What will science education do about technology? Australian Science Teachers Journal, 36(3), 8-21.
24. Gilbert, J.K. (1992). The interface between science education and technology education. International Journal of Science Education, 14(5), 563-578.
25. Glassman, M. (2001). Dewey and Vygotsky: Society, experience, and inquiry in educational practice. Educational Researcher, 50(4), 3-14.
26. Gustafson, B.J. (1998). Design technology problem solving in a Grade one classroom. In P.M. Rowell & BJ. Gustafson (Eds.), Problem solving through technology: Case studies in Alberta elementary classrooms (pp. 1-24). Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta, Centre for Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education.
27. Hennessy, S., & Murphy, P. (1999). The potential for collaborative problem solving in design and technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 9(1), 1-36.
28. Hodson, D. (1998). Teaching and learning science: Towards a personalized approach. Buckingham, UK: Open University.
29. Howe, A.C. (1996). Development of science concepts within a Vygotskian framework. Science Education, 50(1), 31-51.
30. Huberman, A.M., & Miles, M.B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 428-444). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31. Janesick, V.J. (2000). The choreography of qualitative research design: Minuets, improvisations, and crystallization. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 379-400). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32. Kimbell, R., Stables, K„ & Green, R. (1996). Understanding practice in design and technology. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
33. Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 3-32). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34. Layton, D. (1988). Revaluing the T in STS. International Journal of Science Education, 10(4), 367-378.
35. Layton, D. (1993). Technology’s challenge to science education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University.
36. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.
37. McCormick, R., & Davidson, M. (1996). Problem solving and the tyranny of product outcomes. Journal of Design and Technology Education, 7(3), 230-241.
38. McCormick, R., & Murphy, P. (1994, September). Learning the processes in technology. Paper presented to the British Educational Research Association annual conference, Oxford University, UK.
39. Medway, P. (1994). The language component of technological capability: Lessons from architecture. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 4(10), 85-107.
40. Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
41. Newcomb, J. (2000). Managing problem solving in the context of design and make activities: Reflections on classroom practice. Journal of Design and Technology Education, 5(2), 126-131.
42. Orsolini, M., & Pontecorvo, C. (1992). Children’s talk in classroom discussions. Cognition and Instruction, 9(2), 113-136.
43. Parker, L. (1992). Language in science education: Implications for teachers. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 38(2), 26-32.
44. Pea, R.D. (1993). Learning scientific concepts through material and social activities: Conversational analysis meets conceptual change. Educational Psychologist, 28(3), 265-277.
45. Rath, A., & Brown, D.E. (1996). Modes of engagement in science inquiry: A microanalysis of elementary students’ orientations toward phenomena at a summer science camp. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1083-1097.
46. Richmond, G., & Striley, J. (1996). Making meaning in classrooms: Social processes in small-group discourse and scientific knowledge building. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 839-858.
47. Roberts, D.A., MacDonald, D.A.G., & Metcalfe, V.J. (1991, April). Keeping the science proper in school classrooms: Some conceptual challenges inherent in S-T-S teaching. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
48. Roden, C. (1997). Young children’s problem-solving in design and technology: Towards a taxonomy of strategies. Journal of Design and Technology Education, 2(1), 14-19.
49. Roden, C. (1999). How children’s problem solving strategies develop at Key Stage 1. Journal of Design and Technology Education, 4(1), 21-27.
50. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
51. Roth, W.-M. (1995). Inventors, copycats, and everyone else: The emergence of shared resources and practices as defining aspects of classroom communities. Science Education, 79(5), 475-502.
52. Roth, W.-M. (1997). Interactional structures during a Grade 4-5 open-design engineering unit. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(3), 273-302.
53. 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.
54. Rowell, P.M., Gustafson, B.J., & Guilbert, S.M. (1999). Engineers in elementary classrooms: Perceptions of learning to solve technological problems. Research in Science and Technological Education, 77(1), 109-118.
55. Rutherford, FJ. (1989). Science for All Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
56. Roychoudhury, A., & Roth, W.-M. (1996). Interactions in an open-inquiry physics laboratory. International Journal of Science Education, 75(4), 423-445.
57. Shepardson, D.P. (1996). Social interactions and the mediation of science learning in two small. groups of first-graders. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(2), 159-178.
58. Vygotsky, L.S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
59. Wells, G. (1995). Language and the inquiry-oriented curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 25(3), 233-269.