Characterizing Teachers' Verbal Scaffolds to Guide Elementary Students' Creation of Scientific Explanations

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 113, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 321-332

  Songer, Nancy Butler ^a   Shah, Ashima Mathur ^b   Fick, Sarah ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85165402890     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/ssm.12036     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1990). Interactive learning environments and the teaching of science and mathematics. In M. Gardner, J. G. Greeno, R. Reif, A. H. Schoenfeld, A. DiDedda, & E. Stage (Eds.), Toward a scientific practice of science education (pp. 111–139). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Supporting argumentation through students' questions: Case studies in science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 230–284.
3. District Website. (2010). Downloaded from the website [url withheld to conform to the University of Michigan Institutional Review Board and the Districts' Research Committee regulations] on 11/11/10.
4. Fleer, M. (1992). Identifying teacher-child interaction which scaffolds scientific thinking in young children. Science Education, 76(4), 373–397.
5. Glaser, B. G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436–445.
6. Herrenkohl, L. R., & Guerra, M. R. (1998). Participant structures, scientific discourse, and student engagement in fourth grade. Cognition and instruction, 16(4), 431–473.
7. Herrenkohl, L. R., Palinscar, A. S., DeWater, L. S., & Kawasaki, K. (1999). Developing scientific communities in classrooms: A sociocognitive approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3/4), 451–493.
8. Herrenkohl, L. R., Tasker, T., & White, B. (2011). Pedagogical practices to support classroom cultures of scientific inquiry. Cognition and instruction, 29(1), 1–44.
9. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R., & Soloway, E. (2000). Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In J. Minstrell & E. Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiry into inquiry: Science learning and teaching (pp. 283–315). Washington DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science Press.
10. Lee, H. S. (2003). Scaffolding elementary students' authentic inquiry through a written science curriculum (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
11. Leinhardt, G., & Steele, M. (2005). Seeing the complexity of standing to the side: Instructional dialogues. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 87–163.
12. Linn, M. C., Shear, L., Bell, P., & Slotta, J. D. (1999). Organizing principles for science education partnerships: Case studies of students' learning about “rats in space” and “deformed frogs.” Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(2), 67–84.
13. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1999). Designing Qualitative Research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
14. McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanations: Characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers' instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 53–78.
15. McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Synergy between teacher practices and curricular scaffolds to support students in using domain specific and domain general knowledge in writing arguments to explain phenomena. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(3), 416–460.
16. McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153–191.
17. Metz, K. E. (2008). Narrowing the gulf between the practices of science and the elementary school science classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 2(109), 138–161.
18. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
19. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
20. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
21. National Research Council. (2011). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
22. Palinscar, A., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175.
23. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
24. Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. … Soloway, E. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337–386.
25. Reiser, B. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273–304.
26. Scott, P. (1998). Teacher talk and meaning making in science classrooms: A Vygotskian analysis and review. Studies in Science Education, 32(1), 45–80.
27. Songer, N. B. (2006). BioKIDS: An animated conversation on the development of curricular activity structures for inquiry science. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 355–369). New York: Cambridge University Press.
28. Songer, N. B., & Gotwals, A. (2012). Guiding explanation construction by children at the entry points of learning progressions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(2), 141–165.
29. Songer, N. B., Kelcey, B., & Gotwals, A. (2009). How and when does complex reasoning occur? Empirically driven development of a learning progression focused on complex reasoning about biodiversity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6(46), 610–631.
30. Stone, C. A. (1998). The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 344–364.
31. Toulmin, S. (2006). The uses of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.
32. van Zee, E., & Minstrell, J. (1997). Using questioning to guide student thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(2), 227–269.
33. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
34. Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 17, 89–100.