Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 43, Issue 5, pp 1735–1750 | Cite as

Spontaneous Play and Imagination in Everyday Science Classroom Practice

  • Maria AndréeEmail author
  • Lotta Lager-Nyqvist
Article

Abstract

In science education, students sometimes create and engage in spontaneous science-oriented play where ideas about science and scientists are put to use. However, in previous research, little attention has been given to the role of informal spontaneous play in school science classrooms. We argue that, in order to enhance our understanding of learning processes in school science practices, research that investigates play as an aspect of everyday culture is needed. The aim of this paper is to explore students’ informal play as part of activity in lower secondary school science. The empirical study was conducted in two Swedish compulsory schools in grade 6. Data were collected throughout a teaching unit called ‘The Chemistry of Food’ during a 10-week period using video and audiotape recordings of classroom work. Our analyses show that the play students engage in involves the transformations of given tasks. We find that students’ spontaneous collective play offers opportunities for them to explore the epistemic values and norms of science and different ways of positioning in relation to science. Our findings contribute to the understanding of how learning in the school science classroom is socially and culturally–historically embedded and how individual students’ engagement through play may transform and transcend existing classroom practices.

Keywords

Spontaneous play Imagination Science learning Lower secondary school Classroom practice Vygotsky 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We wish to express our gratitude to Professor Per-Olof Wickman at the Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Stockholm University, for conducting the fieldwork together with Lotta Lager-Nyqvist, and giving insightful comments on drafts of this article. The study was part of the project Learning, interactive technologies and the development of narrative knowing and remembering (LINT) which has been supported by grants from The Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, The Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation and The Swedish Research Council.

References

  1. Andrée, M. (2012). Altering conditions for student participation and motive development in school science: Learning from Helena’s mistake. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7(2), 425–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aubusson, P., Fogwill, S., Barr, R., & Perkovic, L. (1997). What happens when students do simulation–role-play in science? Research in Science Education, 2(4), 565–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barab, S., Sadler, T., Heiselt, C., Hickey, D., & Zuiker, S. (2007). Relating narrative, inquiry, and inscriptions: Supporting consequential play. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baumer, S., & Radsliff, K. (2009). Playworlds of children and adults: Cultural perspectives on play pedagogy. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 17(1), 11–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burton, L.D. (1997). Hitting the issues head on: Using role play in science education. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Science Teachers Association, New Orleans, LA, 3 April, Electronic version.Google Scholar
  6. Craighead, J. (2008). Distributed, game-based, intelligent tutoring systemsThe next step in computer based training? Collaborative Technologies and Systems, 2008, International Symposium, 19–23 May, pp. 247–256. Retrieved January 26, 2012, from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4543938&isnumber=4543895. doi: 10.1109/CTS.2008.4543938.
  7. Ferholt, B. (2007). Gunilla Lindqvist’s theory of play and contemporary play theory. Unpublished paper. Retrieved October 19, 2011, from http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Projects/PAPER1%20copy-1.pdf.
  8. Ferholt, B., & Lecusay, R. (2009). Adult and child development in the zone of proximal development: Socratic dialogue in a playworld. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 17(1), 11–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fleer, M. (2008). A cultural–historical perspective on play: Play as a leading activity across cultural communities. In I. Pramling & M. Fleer (Eds.), Play and learning in early childhood settings international perspectives. International Perspectives on Early Childhood Education and Development, 1, 1–17. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-8498-0.
  10. Fleer, M. (2009). Understanding the dialectical relations between everyday concepts and scientific concepts within play-based programs. Research in Science Education, 39(2), 281–306. doi: 10.1007/s11165-008-9085-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gilmore, P. (1983). Spelling ‘Mississippi’: Recontextualizing a literacy-related speech event. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 14(4), 235–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Goldhaber, J. (1994). If we call it science, then can we let the children play? Childhood Education, 71, 24–27.Google Scholar
  13. Gutierrez, C., Rymes, B., & Larson, J. (1995). Script, counterscript, and underlife in the classroom: James Brown versus Brown v. Board of Education. Harvard Educational Review, 65(3), 445–471.Google Scholar
  14. Halvars-Franzén, B. (2010). Barn och etik: möten och möjlighetsvillkor i två förskoleklassers vardag [Children and ethics: Ethical encounters and conditions in the everyday life of two preschool classes]. Doctoral Dissertation, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
  15. Hasse, C. (2002). Gender diversity in play with physics: The problem of premises for participation in activities. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9, 250–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hedegaard, M., & Chaiklin, S. (2005). Radical–local teaching and learning. A cultural–historical approach. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Henniger, M. L. (1987). Learning mathematics and science through play. Childhood Education, 63(3), 167–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ioannidou, A., Repenning, A., Webb, D., Keyser, D., Luhn, L., & Daetwyler, C. (2010). Mr. Vetro: A collective simulation for teaching health science. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(2), 141–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnson, C. I., & Mayer, R. E. (2010). Applying the self-explanation principle to multimedia learning in a computer-based game-like environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1246–1252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lindqvist, G. (1996). Lekens möjligheter. [The possibilities of play]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
  21. Maybin, J. (2007). Literacy under and over the desk: Oppositions and heterogeneity. Language and Education, 21(6), 515–530. doi: 10.2167/le720.0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McSharry, G., & Jones, S. (2000). Role-play in science teaching and learning. School Science Review, 82(298), 73–82.Google Scholar
  23. Moyles, J. (2005). Introduction. In J. Moyles (Ed.), The Excellence of Play. Second Edition. (pp. 1–12). Berkshire: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  24. Nicolopoulou, A., de Sá, B., Ilgaz, H., & Brockmeyer, C. (2009). Using the transformative power of play to educate hearts and minds: From Vygotsky to Vivian Paley and beyond. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 17(1), 42–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nilsson, M. (2009). Creative pedagogy of play—The work of Gunilla Lindqvist. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 17(1), 14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nilsson, E.M. (2010). Simulated "real" worlds: Actions mediated through computer game play in science education. Doctoral Dissertation, Malmö Studies in Educational Sciences, 50, Malmö University.Google Scholar
  27. Persson, C. (2010). Environmental learning related to earth system science in primary school. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 9(3), 196–211.Google Scholar
  28. Pramling-Samuelsson, I. & Fleer, M. (2008). Commonalities and distinctions across countries. In Pramling, I., & Fleer, M. (Eds.), Play and learning in early childhood settings international perspectives. International Perspectives on Early Childhood Education and Development, 1, 173–190. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-8498-0.
  29. Roth, W-M., Ritchie, S., Hudson, P. & Mergard, V. (2011). A study of laughter in science lessons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(5), 437–458.Google Scholar
  30. Roussou, M. (2004). Learning by doing and learning through play: An exploration of interactivity in virtual environments for children. ACM Computers in Entertainment, 2(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Segal, G., & Cosgrove, M. (1994). “I want to find out how the sun works!” Children’s sociodramatic play and its potential role for the early learning of physical science. Research in Science Education, 24, 304–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Singer, D., Golinkoff, R. M., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (Eds.) (2006). Play=Learning: How play motivates and enhances children’s cognitive and social-emotional growth. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Steinkuehler, C., & Chmiel, M. (2006). Fostering scientific habits of mind in the context of online play. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 723–729).Google Scholar
  34. Talamo, A., Pozzi, S. & Mellini, B. (2009). Uniqueness of Experience and Virtual Playworlds: Playing is not just for fun. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 17(1), 23–41.Google Scholar
  35. Tellgren, B. (2004). Förskolan som mötesplats. Barns strategier för tillträden och uteslutningar i lek och samtal [Pre-school as a meeting place—Children’s access–strategies and exclusions in play and conversation]. Doctoral Dissertation, Örebro University.Google Scholar
  36. Vygotsky, L.S. (2002). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Online Version: Psychology and Marxism Internet Archive. Retrieved November 2, 2011, from http://www.marxists.org. (Original work published 1933).
  37. Vygotsky, L. S. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(1), 7–97 (Original work published 1930).Google Scholar
  38. Wickman, P.-O. (2007). NTA—A Swedish school programme for science and technology. In J. Gedrovics, G. Praulite, & A. Voitkans (Eds.), Didactics of science today and tomorrow (Proceedings of International Scientific Conference, 15–16 March) (pp. 206–210). Riga: RPIVA.Google Scholar
  39. Wood, E. (2009). Conceptualizing a pedagogy of play. International perspectives from theory, policy and practice. In D. Kuschner (Ed.), From children to red hatters. Diverse images and issues of play. Play and culture studies, vol. 8. Lanham: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  40. Wood, E. (2012). The state of play. International Journal of Play, 1(1), 4–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Science EducationStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations