Abstract
This paper argues for an inclusive model of science education practice that attempts to facilitate a relationship between “science and all” by paying particular attention to the development of the relationship between the teacher, students and science. This model hinges on the implementation of cogenerative dialogues between students and teachers. Cogenerative dialogues are a form of structured discourse in which teachers and students engage in a collaborative effort to help identify and implement positive changes in classroom teaching and learning practices. A primary goal of this paper is to introduce a methodological and theoretical framework for conducting cogenerative dialogue that is accessible to classroom teachers and their students. I propose that researchers must learn to disseminate their findings to teachers in ways that are practical, in that they provide teachers with information needed to make concrete connections between the research and their teaching, while continuing to make available the theories that support their findings. Using an integration research framework in conjunction with a temporality of learning model, I introduce a method of disseminating research findings that provides both classroom teachers and researchers with access to different forms of knowledge about cogenerative dialogues in the same paper. In doing so, this article examines the relationships between teacher knowledge and researcher knowledge by exploring the practical application of cogenerative dialogues for classrooms teachers and the theoretical implications of using cogenerative dialogues for researchers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
NSF Grant No. REC-0107022.
This rule is an important component of cogenerative dialogue in terms of developing a safe sharing space, but recently, a teacher who was engaging in cogenerative dialogue with two middle school students was faced with a dilemma. Cogenerative dialogue often leads teachers and their students to discussions that lay outside the realm of the classroom. In this instance, a student explained that her home life experiences sometimes prevented her from completing her science homework. Specifically, the student cited issues of child abuse in the home. As court-mandated reporters, it is the legal responsibility of all teachers to alert authorities to claims of child abuse. This revelation put the sanctity of cogenerative dialogue to the test. Fortunately, the teacher and his student were able to use cogenerative dialogue as a space for resolving this issue, enabling the teacher to take appropriate action for the welfare of the child without jeopardizing the trust of his student.
References
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press. .
Calabrese Barton, A. (1998). Reframing “Science for All” through the politics of poverty. Educational Policy, 12(5), 525–541.
Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural–historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions (pp. 88–110). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ercikan, K., & Roth, W.-M. (2006). What good is polarizing research into qualitative and quantitative? Educational Researcher, 35(5), 14–23.
Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
LaVan, S. K. (2004). Cogenerating fluency in urban science classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Martin, S. (2005). The social and cultural dimensions of successful teaching and learning of science in an urban high school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Curtin University, Perth, Australia.
National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Roth, W.-M. (2006). Learning science: A singular plural perspective. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Roth, W.-M., Tobin, K., & Zimmermann, A. (2002). Coteaching/cogenerative dialoguing: Learning environments research as classroom praxis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA, April 6–10, 2002.
Roth, W.-M., & Tobin, K. (2004). Cogenerative dialoguing and metaloguing: Reflexivity of processes and genres [35 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research [On-line Journal], 5(3), Art. 7. Available at: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3–04/04–3-7-e.htm (Accessed April 1, 2006).
Tobin, K., Zurbano, R., Ford, A., & Carambo, C. (2003). Learning to teach through coteaching and cogenerative dialogue. Cybernetics and Human Knowing, 10, 51–73.
Seiler, G., & Elmesky, R. (2005). The who, what, where, and how of our ethnographic research. In K. Tobin, R. Elmesky, & G. Seiler (Eds.), Improving urban science education: New roles for teachers, students, and researchers (pp. 1–19). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was made possible by support from the National Science Foundation under Grant No. REC-0107022. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Martin, S. Where practice and theory intersect in the chemistry classroom: using cogenerative dialogue to identify the critical point in science education. Cult.Scie.Edu. 1, 693–720 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-006-9031-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-006-9031-z