Advertisement

Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 21–29 | Cite as

Silencing of voices in a Swedish science classroom

  • S. Lizette Ramos de Robles
Forum
First Online:

Abstract

From a sociocultural perspective, I discuss data from a Swedish science classroom presented in María Gómez’s article “Student Explanations of their Science Teachers’ Assessments, Grading Practices, and How they learn Science”. In this discussion, I focus on the need to change existing conceptions of assessment in the teaching and learning of science. Next, I talk about the importance of taking into consideration the dialectic between agency and passivity as filters in order to understand what student silence may signify in science classes as well as in relation to their perceptions of assessment. I conclude with the importance of the teacher’s role in developing formative assessment, along with the challenges in developing assessments which transform science education into a relevant field of knowledge for both students and society at large.

Keywords

Assessment in science Sociocultural perspectives Agency Passivity 

Resumen

Desde una perspectiva sociocultural se analizan y se discuten datos presentados en el artículo “Student explanations of their science teachers’ assessments, grading practices and how they learn science”. Primero se abordan aspectos generales en torno a los cambios en las concepciones sobre la evaluación dentro de la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de las ciencias. Posteriormente y con la finalidad de reflexionar en torno a los datos, se aborda el par dialéctico agency/passivity para poder re-significar los silencios de los estudiantes en clases de ciencias así como sus percepciones sobre la evaluación. Finalmente se analiza el papel del profesor en el desarrollo de una evaluación formativa, así como los retos pendientes para el logro de una evaluación que transforme la educación de las ciencias en un campo de conocimiento relevante y pertinente tanto para los ciudadanos como para la sociedad.

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

References

  1. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination (M. Holquist, Ed.; C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristics of formative assessment in science education. Science Education, 85, 536–553. doi: 10.1002/sce.1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Broadfoot, P. M. (1996). Education, assessment and society: A sociological analysis. Philadelphia: Open University Press Buckingham.Google Scholar
  4. Chen, J. (2015). Formative assessment as a vehicle for changing classroom practice in a specific cultural context. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10, 753–762. doi: 10.1007/s11422-014-9599-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cowie, B. (2005). Pupil commentary on assessment for learning. The Curriculum Journal, 16, 137–151. doi: 10.1080/09585170500135921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cowie, B. (2012). Focusing on the classroom: Assessment for learning. In B. Fraser, K. Y. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of research in science education (pp. 679–690). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gallard, A. J., Pitts, W., Bustos-Flores, B., Claeys, L., & Brkich, K. (2015). Latina resiliency: Dealing with contextual mitigating factors in pursuit of STEM careers. Paper presented at the meeting of the Understanding interventions that Broaden Participation in Science Careers “Translating Research, Impacting Practice”, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  8. Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond testing: Towards a theory of educational assessment. London: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  9. Gipps, C. (1999). Socio-cultural aspects of assessment. Review of Research in Education, 24, 355–392.Google Scholar
  10. National Research Council. (1999). The assessment of science meets the science of assessment. Board on Testing and Assessment Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  11. Roth, W.-M. (2006). Toward a dialectical notion and praxis of scientific literacy. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(4), 377–398. doi: 10.1080/00220270601032025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Roth, W.-M. (2011). Passibility. At the limits of the constructivist metaphor. Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-1908-8.Google Scholar
  13. Sanmartí, N. (2002). Didáctica de las ciencias en la educación secundaria. Barcelona: Síntesis Educación.Google Scholar
  14. Tobin, K. (2006). Aligning the cultures of teaching and learning science in urban high schools. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1, 219–252. doi: 10.1007/s11422-005-9008-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Tobin, K. (2008). Structuring success in science labs. In A. J. Rodríguez (Ed.), The multiple faces of agency: Innovative strategies for effecting change in urban contexts (pp. 83–102). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  16. Winchell, M., Kress, T. M., & Tobin, K. (2016). Teaching/learning radical listening: Joe’s legacy among three generations of practitioners. In M. F. Agnello & W. M. Reynolds (Eds.), Practicing critical pedagogy (pp. 99–112). New York, NY: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319.25847-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centro Universitario de Ciencias Biológicas y AgropecuariasUniversidad de GuadalajaraZapopanMexico

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options