Skip to main content
Log in

‘From the mountain and then?’ Five-year-olds visiting the ‘Way of the water’ exhibition at a science centre

  • Articles
  • Published:
International Journal of Early Childhood Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The focus of this article is on ten 5-year-old children and their teacher visiting a ‘Way of the water’ exhibition (a large scale model showing the flow of water from the mountains to the sea) at a science centre and a later follow up discussion at a circle-time back at pre-school. The aims of the study were to analyse, describe and discuss (a) what learning-content was focussed upon, (b) what communicative strategies were adopted by the adults (i.e. the teacher and a museum guide) when talking with the children about the natural phenomena met at the ‘Way of the water’, and (c) how different contexts framed the interaction between the adults and the children. The results show that both the guide and the teacher focussed mainly on single facts about nature and cultural phenomena and only to a lesser degree on environmental processes. The adults adopted three different strategies with respect to how the learning-content was approached, namely providing facts, directing attention by posing questions, and asking for accounts. We argue that each of these communicative strategies was related to a particular contextual framing. The children were, at times, very spontaneous and followed rules for everyday social interaction, whereas, when prompted by the teacher to arrive at ‘correct’ answers, they adapted to the well known ‘inquiry-response-evaluation’ [IRE] pattern. There are no instances in the data where the children express the idea of a large-scale coherent model. On the contrary, they talked only about individual parts of the exhibition — that is to say, things they actually saw, heard or felt. This may, to a large extent, be due to the fact that the adults did not on any occasion attempt to explain the model. Possible reasons for this are suggested in the concluding discussion.

Résumé

Le thème de cet article se concentre sur la visite par dix enfants de cinq ans et leur enseignante d’une exposition intitulée «Le chemin de l’eau» (une maquette à grande échelle qui montre le trajet de l’eau des montagnes à la mer), dans un centre scientifique, ainsi que sur la discussion qui a suivi au retour à l’école maternelle. L’objectif de cette étude était d’analyser, de décrire et de discuter des questions suivantes: (a) quel était le contenu ciblé, (b) quelles étaient les stratégies communicatives adoptées par les adultes (c’est-à-dire l’enseignante et le guide du musée) lorsque ceux-ci parlaient avec les enfants des phénomènes naturels rencontrés à «Le chemin de l’eau», et (c) comment des contextes différents ont-ils créé encadré l’interaction entre les adultes et les enfants. Les résultats montrent que tant l’enseignante que le guide se concentraient principalement sur des faits isolés de phénomènes naturels et culturels, et seulement à un degré inférieur sur des processus écologiques. Les adultes adoptaient trois stratégies différentes concernant la manière d’approcher le contenu, à savoir fournir les faits, diriger l’attention en posant des questions et demander des explications. Nous soutenons que chacune de ces stratégies de communication était liée à un cadre contextuel particulier Les enfants étaient parfois très spontanés et suivaient les règles de l’interaction sociale quotidienne, tandis que, lorsqu’ils étaient encouragés par l’enseignante à donner de «bonnes» réponses, ils adoptaient le comportement type très connu «d’enquête-réponse-évaluation». Il n’y a aucun exemple dans les données où les enfants expriment l’idée d’une maquette à grande échelle cohérente. Au contraire, ils ne partaient que de parties isolées de l’exposition, soit de choses qu’ils ont effectivement vues, entendues ou touchées. Cela peut, en grande partie, être dû au fait que les adultes n’ont à aucune occasion essayé d’expliquer la maquette. En conclusion, la discussion suggère des explications possibles.

Resumen

Este artículo trata de la visita de 10 niños de 5 años y su maestra a la exposición “El Camino del Agua” (una maqueta en gran escala que muestra el recorrido del agua desde las montañas hasta el mar en un centro de ciencias y la discusión subsiguiente en el preescolar. El objetivo del estudio fue analizar, describir y discutir (a) en qué se centró el aprendizaje, (b) qué estrategias de comunicación adoptaron los adultos (por ejemplo la maestra y el guia del museo) al hablar con los niños de los fenómenos naturales vistos en “El Camino del Agua”, y (c) qué contextos diferentes enmarcaron la interacción entre los adultos y los niños. Los resultados muestran que tanto la guia como la maestra se concentraron principalmente en datos aislados sobre los fenómenos naturales y culturales y solamente en grado menor sobre los procesos medioambientales. Los adultos adoptaron tres estrategias diferentes con respecto a cómo enseñar/para que los niños aprendan: entregar datos, llamar la atención sobre un determinado tema haciendo preguntas y pidiendo explicaciones. Suponemos que cada una de estas estrategias comunicativas estaban relacionadas con un marco contextual particular. Por momentos, los niños se comportaron en forma espontánea siguiendo las reglas normales de interacción social mientras que al preguntarles algo la maestra para llegar a una respuesta “correcta”, se acomodaban al conocido patrón ‘pregunta-respuesta-evaluación’. No hay datos que indiquen que los niños hay an expresado ideas sobre un modelo global coherente. Por el contrario, comentaron partes aisladas de la exposicíon, es decir cosas que vieron, escucharon o sintieron. Ello se puede deber, en mayor medida, a que los adultos en ninguna ocasión intentaron explicar el modelo. Las posibles razones de ello se sugieren en la discusión final.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, D., Lucas, K., & Ginns, I. S. (2003). Theoretical perspectives on learning in an informal setting.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 177–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1995).Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D. (1997).Discourse and cognition. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleer, M. (2008). Understanding the dialectical relations between everyday concepts and scientific concepts within play-based programs.Research in Science Education [Electronic version]. First published on line 2008-05-31.

  • Goffman, E. (1981).Forms of talk. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helldén, G., Lindahl, B., & Redfors, R. (2005).Lärande och undervisning i naturvetenskap: En forskningsöversikt [Learning and teaching in natural science: A research overview] (Vetenskapsrådets rapportserie, 2005: 2). Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet [Swedish Research Council].

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivarsson, J., Schoultz, J., & Säljö, R. (2002). Map reading versus mind reading: Revisiting children’s understanding of the shape of the earth. In M. Limón, & L. Mason (Eds.),Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice (pp. 77–99). Amsterdam: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and value. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 296–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linell, P. (1998).Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehan, H. (1979).Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, N. (1995).The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naylor, S., Keogh. B., & Downing, B. (2007). Argumentation and primary science.Research in Science education, 37, 17–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1956).The child’s conception of the world (First edition in English 1929). London: Paladin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pramling, I. (1994).Kunnandets grunder [The basic of knowledge]. Gothenburg. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pramling Samuelsson, I., & Asplund Carlsson, M. (2003).Det lekande lärande barnet i en utvecklingspedagogisk teori [A playing learning child in a developmental pedagogical theory]. Stockholm: Liber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Säljö, R. (2000).Lärande i praktiken: Ett sociokulturellt perspektiv [Learning in practice: A socio cultural perspective]. Stockholm: Prisma.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoultz, J., Säljö, R., & Wyndhamn, J. (2001). Heavenly talk: Discourse, artefacts, and children’s understanding of elementary astronomy.Human Development, 44(2&3), 103–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepardson, D. P. (1997). Of butterflies and beetles: First graders’ ways of seeing and talking about insect cycles.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 873–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swedish National Agency for Education. (1998).Curriculum for the pre-school: Lpfö 98. Stockholm: Fritzes. (English version)

    Google Scholar 

  • Thulin, S. (2006).Vad händer med lärandets objekt? En studie av hur lärare och barn i förskolan kommunicerar naturvetenskapliga fenomen. [What happens to the object of learning? A study of how teachers and children communicate natural phenomena]. Växjö, Sweden: Växjö University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tulviste, P. (1991).The cultural-historical development of verbal thinking. Commack, NY: Nova Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wartofsky, M. W. (1979).Models: Representation and the scientific understanding. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. V. (1985).Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zetterqvist, A., & Kärrqvist, C. (2007).Naturvetenskap med yngre barn: En forskningsöversikt [Science education with young children: A research overview] (Interna rappporter, 07:04). Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Åberg-Bengtsson, L. (1998).Entering a graphicate society: Young children learning graphs and charts (Göteborg Studies in Educational Sciences, 127). Gothenburg. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Åberg-Bengtsson, L. (2006). ‘Then we can take half … almost’: Elementary students learning bar graphs and pie charts in a computer-based context.International Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 25, 116–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Åberg-Bengtsson, L., & Ottosson, T. (2006). What lies behind graphicacy? Relating students’ results on a test of graphically represented quantitative information to formal academic achievement.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Åberg-Bengtsson, L., & Sträng, M. H. (2003, August).Young students’ grappling with graphic inscriptions construed on a computer and manually drawn. Paper presented at the 10th EARLI Conference, Padova, Italy.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Monica H. Sträng.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sträng, M.H., Åberg-Bengtsson, L. ‘From the mountain and then?’ Five-year-olds visiting the ‘Way of the water’ exhibition at a science centre. IJEC 41, 13–31 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168483

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168483

Keywords

Navigation