Science & Education

, Volume 16, Issue 3–5, pp 267–289 | Cite as

Transformation through Language Use: Children’s Spontaneous Metaphors in Elementary School Science

Article

Abstract

This article examines the role elementary school children’s spontaneous metaphors play in learning science. The data consists of tape recordings of about 25 h from five different schools. The material is analysed using a practical epistemology analysis and by using Dewey’s ideas on the continuity and transformation of experience. The results show the rich and varied meanings that children put into their spontaneous metaphors. Their metaphors deal with facts as well as norms and aesthetics in relation to the science content taught and they influence learning both through what is made salient, as well as through their relations to the children’s possibilities of proceeding with their undertakings. Often one and the same metaphor encompassed all these cognitive, aesthetic and normative aspects at the same time. It is discussed how this rich meaning can be cultured in a productive way, and how the children’s spontaneous metaphors, with all their relations, can be used to enhance conceptual learning and also learning about the nature of metaphor use in science. Through their connection with various experiences of the children, it is also shown how children’s spontaneous metaphors have the potential to enliven and humanise the subject.

Keywords

Dewey elementary school learning metaphor primary school science 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Asoko H. (2002). Developing Conceptual Understanding in Primary Science. Cambridge Journal of Education 32(2):153–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bloom J.W. (1992a). The Development of Scientific Knowledge in Elementary School Children: A Context of Meaning Perspective. Science Education 76(4):339–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bloom J.W. (1992b). Contexts of Meaning and Conceptual Integration: How Children Understand and Learn. In: Duschl R.A., Hamilton R.J. (eds) Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Psychology, and Educational Theory and Practice. State University of New York Press, Albany, pp. 177–194Google Scholar
  4. Brickhouse N.W., Lowery P., Schultz K. (2000). What Kind of a Girl does Science? The Construction of School Science Identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 37(5):441–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown D., Clement J. (1989). Overcoming Misconceptions via Analogical Reasoning: Abstract Transfer versus Explanatory Model Construction. Instructional Science 18(4):237–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cameron L. (2002). Metaphors in the Learning of Science: A Discourse Focus. British Educational Research Journal 28(5):673–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cobern W.W., Aikenhead G.S. (1998). Cultural Aspects of Learning Science. In: Fraser B.J., Tobin K. (eds) The International Handbook of Science Education. Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp. 39–52Google Scholar
  8. Dagher Z.R. (1995). Review of Studies on the Effectiveness of Instructional Analogies in Science Education. Science Education 79(3):295–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dewey, J.: 1925/1958, Experience and Nature, Dover, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Dewey, J.: 1934/1980, Art as Experience, Perigree Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Dewey, J.: 1938/1997, Experience and Education, Touchstone, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Flannery M.C. (1991). Science and Aesthetics: A Partnership for Science Education. Science Education 75(5):577–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gee J.P., Green J.L. (1998). Discourse Analysis, Learning and Social Practice: a Methodological Study. Review of Research in Education 23:119–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grayling A.C. (1996). Epistemology. In: Bunnin N., Tsui-James E.P. (eds) The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy. Blackwell, Oxford, U.K., pp. 38–63Google Scholar
  15. Heywood D. (2002). The Place of Analogies in Science Education. Cambridge Journal of Education 32(2):233–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hutchby I., Wooffitt R. (1998). Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Polity Press, Cambridge, U.KGoogle Scholar
  17. Jakobson, B. & Wickman, P.-O.: manuscript, Aesthetic Distinction in Elementary School ScienceGoogle Scholar
  18. Keller E.F. (1998). Gender and Science: Origin, History, and Politics. In: Hull D.L., Ruse M. (eds) The Philosophy of Biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 398–413Google Scholar
  19. Lakoff G., Johnson M. (2003). Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  20. Lave J. (1996). The Practice of Learning. In: Chaiklin S., Lave J. (eds) Understanding Practice: Perspectives on Activity and Context. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., pp. 3–32Google Scholar
  21. Lemke J.L. (1990). Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values. Ablex Publishing Corporation, NorwoodGoogle Scholar
  22. Lidar M., Lundqvist E., Östman L. (2006). Teaching and Learning in the Science Classroom: The Interplay Between Teachers’ Epistmological Moves and Students’ Practical Epistemology. Science Education 90(1):148–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lubben F., Netshisaulu T., Campbell B. (1999). Student’s Use of Cultural Metaphors and their Scientific Understandings Related to Heating. Science Education 83(6):761–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lynch M. (1993). Scientific Practice and Ordinary Action. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  25. Merriam-Webster: 2004, Merriam Webster Online Dictionary, http://www.m-w.com
  26. Mortimer E.F., Scott P.H. (2003). Meaning Making in Secondary Science Classrooms. Open University Press, Maidenhead, U.KGoogle Scholar
  27. Muscari P.G. (1988). The Metaphor in Science and in the Science Classroom Science Education 72(4):423–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ogborn J., Kress G., Martins I., McGillicuddy K. (1996). Explaining Science in the Classroom. Open University Press, Buckingham, U.KGoogle Scholar
  29. Östman L. (1994). Rethinking Science Teaching as a Moral Act. Journal of Nordic Educational Research 14(3):141–150Google Scholar
  30. Piaget J. (1970). Genetic Epistemology. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Rogoff B. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Rorty R. (1991). Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth: Philosophical Papers Volume 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.Google Scholar
  33. Sutton C. (1995). Words, Science and Learning, Open University Press, BuckinghamGoogle Scholar
  34. Thomas G.P., McRobbie C.J. (1999). Using Metaphor to Probe Students’ Conceptions of Chemistry Learning. International Journal of Science Education 21(6):667–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tobin K., Tippins D.J. (1996). Metaphors as Seeds for Conceptual Change and the Improvement of Science Teaching. Science Education 80(6):711–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wickman P.-O. (2004). The Practical Epistemologies of the Classroom: a Study of Laboratory work. Science Education 88(3):325–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wickman P.-O. (2006). Aesthetic Experience in Science Education: Learning as Situated Talk and Action. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  38. Wickman P.-O., Östman L. (2002a). Learning as Discourse Change: A Sociocultural Mechanism. Science Education 86(5):1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wickman P.-O., Östman L. (2002b). Induction as an Empirical Problem: How Students Generalize During Practical Work. International Journal of Science Education 24(5):465–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wittgenstein L. (1967). Philosophical Investigations (second edition). Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  41. Wong E.D. (1993). Understanding the Generative Capacity of Analogies as a Tool for Explanation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30(10):1259–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zembylas M. (2004). Emotion Metaphors and Emotional Labor in Science Teaching. Science Education 88(3):301–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Curriculum Studies and CommunicationStockholm Institute of EducationStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations