Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Examining Teachers’ Instructional Moves Aimed at Developing Students’ Ideas and Questions in Learner-Centered Science Classrooms

  • Published:
Journal of Science Teacher Education

Abstract

Prior research has shown that orchestrating scientific discourse in classrooms is difficult and takes a great deal of effort on the part of teachers. In this study, we examined teachers’ instructional moves to elicit and develop students’ ideas and questions as they orchestrated discourse with their fifth grade students during a learner-centered environmental biology unit. The unit materials included features meant to support teachers in eliciting and working with students’ ideas and questions as a source for student-led investigations. We present three contrasting cases of teachers to highlight evidence that shows teachers’ differing strategies for eliciting students’ ideas and questions, and for developing their ideas, questions and questioning skills. Results from our cross case analysis provide insight into the ways in which teachers’ enactments enabled them to work with students’ ideas and questions to help advance learning. Consistent with other studies, we found that teachers could readily elicit ideas and questions but experienced challenges in helping students develop them. Findings suggest a need for more specified supports, such as specific discourse strategies, to help teachers attend to student thinking. We explore implications for curricular tools and discuss a need for more examples of effective discourse moves for use by teachers in orchestrating scientific discourse.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • 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(3), 395–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.

  • Baranes, R., Perry, M., & Stigler, J. W. (1989). Activation of real-world knowledge in the solution of word problems. Cognition and Instruction, 6(4), 287–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beatty, I. D., Gerace, W. J., Leonard, W. J., & Dufresne, R. J. (2006). Designing effective questions for classroom response system teaching. American Journal of Physics, 74(1), 31–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Patrick, H., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1997). Teaching for understanding. In B. J. Biddle, T. L. Good, & I. F. Goodson (Eds.), International handbook of teachers and teaching (Vol. II, pp. 819–878). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsen, W. S. (1988). The effects of science teacher subject-matter knowledge on teacher questioning and classroom discourse. Unpublished doctoral thesis.

  • Carlsen, W. S. (1993). The effects of science teacher subject-matter knowledge on teacher questioning and classroom discourse. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Stanford University, Palo Alto.

  • Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin, C., Brown, D. E., & Bruce, B. C. (2002). Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(5), 521–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chin, C., & Chia, L.-G. (2006). Problem-based learning: Using ill-structured problems in biology project work. Science Education, 90(1), 44–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, T., Kelly, G. J., & Brown, C. (2000). Ways of knowing beyond facts and laws of science: An ethnographic investigation of student engagement in scientific practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(3), 237–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, J. T. (1988). The remedial status of student questioning. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 20, 197–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dufresne, R. J., & Gerace, W. J. (2004). Assessing-To-Learn: Formative assessment in physics instruction. The Physics Teacher, 42(7), 428–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallas, K. (1995). Talking their way into science: Hearing children’s questions and theories, responding with curricula. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrenkohl, L. R., & Guerra, M. R. (1998). Participant structures, scientific discourse, and student engagement in fourth grade. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 431–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrenkohl, L. R., Palincsar, 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A., Navon, O., Kipnis, M., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2005). Developing students’ ability to ask more and better questions resulting from inquiry-type chemistry laboratories. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(7), 791–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holquist, M. (1990). Dialogism. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, V., & Ambrose, R. (2008). Making the most of story problems in teaching. Teaching Children Mathematics, 15, 260–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, O., & Buxton, C. A. (2001). Diversity and equity in science education: Research, policy, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, R., Giles, N. D., & Schauble, L. (2002). Children’s work with data. In R. Lehrer & L. Schauble (Eds.), Investigating real data in the classroom: Expanding children’s understanding of math and science (pp. 1–26). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2006). Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 371–388). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnusson, S. J., Palincsar, A. S., & Templin, M. (2004). Community, culture, and conversation in inquiry-based science instruction. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science (pp. 131–155). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., & Sokolove, P. G. (2000). Can undergraduate biology students learn to ask higher level questions? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 854–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. R. (1989). Factual writing: Exploring and challenging social reality. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, R. W., & Harris, C. J. (2006). No child left behind and science education: Opportunities, challenges, and risks. Elementary School Journal, 106(5), 467–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, K. L., & Pimentel, D. S. (2010). Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation. Science Education, 94(2), 203–229.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaels, S., O’Connor, C., & Resnick, L. B. (2002). Accountable talk: Classroom conversation that works (CD-ROM set). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moje, E. B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., & Marx, R. W. (2001). “Maestro, what is ‘quality’?”: Language, iteracy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(4), 469–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumme, J., & Caroll, C. E. (2007). Learning to lead mathematics professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2010). A framework for science education: Preliminary public draft. Washington, DC: Committee on Conceptual Framework for New Science Education Standards, Board on Science Education, National Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (1991). Instructional discourse, student engagement, and literature achievement. Research in the Teaching of English, 25, 261–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, M. C., & Michaels, S. (1993). Aligning academic talk and participation status through revoicing: Analysis of a classroom discourse strategy. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 24(4), 318–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, M. C., & Michaels, S. (1996). Shifting participant frameworks: Orchestrating thinking practices in group discussions. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Discourse, learning, and schooling (pp. 63–103). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penuel, W. R., Yarnall, L., Koch, M., & Roschelle, J. (2004). Meeting teachers in the middle: Designing handheld computer-supported activities to improve student questioning. In Y. B. Kafai, W. A. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon & F. Herrera (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 404–411). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Phillips, R. S., Harris, C. J., Penuel, W. R., & Cheng, B. (2010, March). Teachers managing students’ ideas, questions, and contributions in the context of an innovative inquirybased elementary science unit. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.

  • Reeve, S., & Bell, P. (2009). Children’s self-documentation and understanding of the concepts ‘healthy’ and ‘unhealthy’. International Journal of Science Education, 31(14), 1953–1974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, M. B. (1986). Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up!. Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 43–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1992). Text-based and knowledge-based questioning by children. Cognition and Instruction, 9, 177–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (2002). A highly interactive discourse structure. Social Constructivist Teaching, 9, 131–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D. L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D. L., Lin, X., Brophy, S., & Bransford, J. D. (1999). Toward the development of flexibily adaptive instructional designs. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 183–214). Mahwah, NJ: Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shechtman, N., Knudsen, J., & Stevens, H. (2010, May). The Bridging Teacher Professional Development project: Supporting mathematical argumentation in distressed urban middle school contexts. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.

  • Shodell, M. (1995). The question-driven classroom: Student questions as course curriculum on biology. The American Biology Teacher, 57, 278–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shutt, K., Phillips, R. S., Vye, N., Van Horne, K., & Bransford, J. D. (2010, April). Developing science inquiry skills with challenge-based, student-directed learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.

  • Tabak, I., & Baumgartner, E. (2004). The teacher as partner: Exploring participant structures, symmetry, and identity work in scaffolding. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 393–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J., Braaten, M., & Windschitl, M. (2009, June). Learning progressions as vision tools for advancing teachers’ pedagogical performance. Paper presented at the Learning Progressions in Science Conference, Iowa City, IA.

  • Thompson, J., Windschitl, M., & Braaten, M. (2009, March). Toward a theory of developing pedagogical expertise: A 3-year study of individuals becoming teachers. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Conference, Anaheim, CA.

  • Thompson, J., Windschitl, M., & Braaten, M. (2010, March). Developing a theory of teacher practice. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Conference, Philadelphia, PA.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997). Using questioning to guide student thinking. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(2), 227–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren, B., Ballenger, C., Ogonowski, M., Rosebery, S., & Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2001). Rethinking diversity in learning science: The logic of everyday sense-making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(5), 529–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G., & Mejia-Arauz, R. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yarnall, L., Shechtman, N., & Penuel, W. R. (2006). Using handheld computers to support improved classroom assessment in science: Results from a field trial. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(2), 142–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the National Science Foundation (NSF #0354453). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors. We gratefully acknowledge Drue Gawel, Hannah Lesk, Allison Moore, Kari Shutt, Kathryn Torres, Kersti Tyson, and Katie Van Horn for their assistance with data collection. We extend special thanks to the teachers and students who participated in the project. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2010 International Conference of the Learning Sciences.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. SRI International, 333 Ravenswood Avenue, Menlo Park, CA, 94025, USA

    Christopher J. Harris & William R. Penuel

  2. University of Washington, 312 Miller, Box 353600, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA

    Rachel S. Phillips

Authors
  1. Christopher J. Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rachel S. Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. William R. Penuel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher J. Harris.

About this article

Cite this article

Harris, C.J., Phillips, R.S. & Penuel, W.R. Examining Teachers’ Instructional Moves Aimed at Developing Students’ Ideas and Questions in Learner-Centered Science Classrooms. J Sci Teacher Educ 23, 769–788 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-011-9237-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-011-9237-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation