Abstract
In science classrooms, the epistemic practices of explanation building and argumentation often extend over multiple episodes of talk during a single lesson or across several lessons. Analyzing this kind of discourse requires a way to identify patterns that emerge over time to better understand student participation and how teachers support students’ disciplinary work. In this paper, we share the development of a unique graphic representation of classroom talk which we call barcodes. These barcodes assisted our analysis of when and how, over multiple points in a school year, three elementary science teachers facilitated students’ science sensemaking during whole-class discussions in ways that ended up promoting, sustaining, or constraining students’ collective development of ideas. Barcodes allowed us to see that each teacher regularly engaged students in rigorous whole-class talk over a school year, yet each classroom had distinct patterns of teacher involvement and activity sequences that preceded or co-occurred with these conversations. Paired with transcripts, barcodes illuminated a relationship between teacher responsiveness to specific student ideas and higher discursive rigor. Finally, iterative cross-referencing between barcodes and transcripts sparked further inquiries into supportive conditions for talk that were not as apparent using transcripts alone. In this way, the barcode functioned both as an analytical tool and a final visualization of discourse events in a series of lessons from grades 5 and 6 science classrooms.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Not applicable.
References
Alexander, R. (2015). Dialogic pedagogy at scale: oblique perspectives. In L. Resnick, C. Asterhan, & S. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 429–439). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Applebee, A., Langer, J., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based approaches to developing understanding: classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school English. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 685–730.
Badreddine, Z., & Buty, C. (2011). Discursive reconstruction of the scientific story in a teaching sequence. International Journal of Science Education, 33(6), 773–795. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.496475.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: one concept, two hills to climb. In S. C. Tan, H. J. So, & J. Yeo (Eds.), Knowledge creation in education (pp. 35–52). Singapore: Springer.
Bertin, J. (1983). Semiology of graphics: diagrams, networks, maps. Translated by W. J. Berg. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74.
Chinn, C., & Malhotra, B. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: a theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175–218.
Clarke, S. N. (2015). The right to speak. In L. Resnick, C. Asterhan, & S. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 167–180). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Colley, C., & Windschitl, M. (2016). Rigor in elementary science students’ discourse: The role of responsiveness and Supportive Conditions forTalk. Science Education, 100(6), 1009–1038.
Damsa, C., Kirschner, P., Andriessen, J., Erkens, G., & Sins, P. (2010). Shared epistemic agency – an empirical study of an emergent construct. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 143–186.
Danish, J. Enyedy, N., Hall, M., & Angeles, L. (2006). Unpacking the mediation of invented representations. In International conference of the learning sciences (pp. 113–119).
Derry, S., Pea, R., Barron, B., Engle, R., Erickson, F., & Goldman, R.… Sherin, B. (2010). Conducting video research in the learning sciences: Guidance on selection, analysis, technology, and ethics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 3–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903452884.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 5–12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023007005.
Gee, J. (2008). A sociocultural perspective on opportunities to learn. In P. Moss, D. Pullin, J. Gee, E. Haertel, & L. Young (Eds.), Assessment, equity, and opportunity to learn (pp. 76–108). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hazelkorn, E., Ryan, C., Beernaert, Y., Constantinou, C., Deca, L., Grangeat, M., … Welzel-Breuer, M. (2015). Science education for responsible citizenship. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_science_education/ KI-NA-26-893-EN-N.pdf. Accessed 25 Oct 2019.
Henningsen, M., & Stein, M. (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(5), 524–549.
Jackson, K., Garrison, A., Wilson, J., Gibbons, L., & Shahan, E. (2013). Exploring relationships between setting up complex tasks and opportunities to learn in concluding whole-class discussions in middle-grades mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(4), 646–682.
Kawasaki, K., Herrenkohl, L., & Yeary, S. (2004). Theory building and modeling in a sinking and floating unit: a case study of third and fourth grade students’ developing epistemologies of science. International Journal of Science Education, 26(11), 1299–1324. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000177226.
Lee, O., Quinn, H., & Valdes, G. (2013). Science and language for English language learners in relation to Next Generation Science Standards and with implications for Common Core State Standards for English language arts and mathematics. Educational Researcher, 42(4), 223–233.
Lemke, J. (2001). The long and the short of it: comments on multiple timescale studies of human activity. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(1/2), 17–26.
Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge: values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Manz, E. (2015). Representing student argumentation as functionally emergent from scientific activity. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 553–590. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314558490.
Mehan, H., & Cazden, C. (2015). The study of classroom discourse: early history and current developments. In L. B. Resnick, C. Asterham, & S. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 13–36). Washington, D.C.: AERA.
Meirelles, I. (2013). Design for information. Beverly: Rockport Press.
Mercer, N. (1996). The quality of talk in children’s collaborative activity in the classroom. Learning and Instruction, 6(4), 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00021-7.
Mercer, N. (2008). The seeds of time: why classroom dialogue needs a temporal analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(1), 33–59.
Mercer, N. (2009). Dialogic teaching in the primary science classroom. Language and Education, 23(4), 353–369.
Mercer, N. (2010). The analysis of classroom talk: methods and methodologies. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709909X479853.
Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Michaels, S., & O’Connor, C. (2012). Talk science primer. Cambridge, MA.
Mishler, E. (1991). Representing discourse: the rhetoric of transcription. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 1, 255–280.
Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
National Research Council (NRC). (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework of New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Nystrand, M., Wu, L., Gamoran, A., Zeiser, S., & Long, D. (2003). Questions in time: investigating the structure and dynamics of unfolding classroom discourse. Discourse Processes, 35(2), 135–198. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326950DP3502.
Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: critical reflections. London: Nuffield Foundation.
Purchase, H., Andrienko, N., Jankun-Kelly, T., & Ward, M. (2008). Theoretical foundations of information visualization. In A. Kerren et al. (Eds.), Information Visualization (pp. 46–64). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Radinsky, J., Oliva, S., & Alamar, K. (2010). Camila, the earth, and the sun: constructing an idea as shared intellectual property. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(6), 619–642. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20354.
Resnick, L.B., Michaels, S., & O’Connor, M.C. (2010). How (well-structured) talk builds the mind. In R. Sternberg & D. Preiss (Eds.), From genes to context: new discoveries about learning from educational research and their applications (pp. 163–194). New York: Springer.
Salmon, W. (1989). Four decades of scientific explanation. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 13, 3–219.
Schoenfeld, A. (1994). Reflection on doing and teaching mathematics. In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Mathematical thinking and problem solving (pp. 53–70). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stroupe, D. (2014). Ambitious t eachers’ design and use of classrooms as a place of science. Science Education, 101(3), 458–485. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21273.
Tiberghien, A., Buty, C., & Maréchal, J. (2005). Physics teaching sequences and students' learning.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1934). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), trans. N. Minich The Collected Works of L. S. Vygotsky. New York: Plenum Press (1987).
Warren, B., Ballenger, C., Ogonowski, M., Rosebery, A., & 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.
Weiss, I., Pasley, J., Smith, P., Banilower, E., & Heck, D. (2003). Looking inside the classroom: a study of K–12 mathematics and science education in the United States. Chapel Hill: Horizon Research.
Windschitl, M. (2019). Disciplinary literacy versus doing school. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 63(1), 7–13.
Funding
Not applicable.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Not applicable.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Code Availability
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Colley, C., Windschitl, M. A Tool for Visualizing and Inquiring into Whole-Class Sensemaking Discussions. Res Sci Educ 51, 51–70 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09962-6
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09962-6