Abstract
This article explores the wow-effect as a phenomenon in science teacher education. Through ethnographic fieldwork at a teachers’ college in Denmark, the author encounters a phenomenon enacted in a particular way of teaching that wows the students. The students are in the process of becoming natural science/technology and biology teachers. This article explores and theorizes the wow-effect by examining tension fields within the phenomenon between boredom and engagement, new and old technologies, and being active and sedentary. By situating this phenomenon in a discussion of theory and practice in teacher education, the author discusses how teaching according to the wow-effect is both engaging for the students as well as problematic in relation to learning certain theoretical aspects of natural science/technology and biology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Axelson, R. D., & Flick, A. (2010). Defining student engagement. Change: The magazine of higher learning, 43(1), 38–44. doi:10.1080/00091383.2011.533096.
Bamford, A. (2006). The wow factor—global research compendium on the impact of the arts in education. New York: Waxmann.
Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway—quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. London: Duke University Press.
Bellocchi, A., Ritchie, S. M., Tobin, K., Sandhu, M., & Sandhu, S. (2013). Exploring emotional climate in preservice science teacher education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8, 529–552. doi:10.1007/s11422-013-9526-3.
Billings, E., & Mathison, C. (2012). I get to use an iPod in school? using technology-based advance organizers to support the academic success of english learners. Science Education and Technology, 21, 494–505. doi:10.1007/s10956-011-9341-0.
Boyce, C., Mishra, C., Halverson, K., & Thomas, A. (2014). Getting students outside: Using technology as a way to stimulate engagement. Science Education and Technology, 23, 815–826. doi:10.1007/s10956-014-9514-8.
Breidenstein, G. (2007). The meaning of boredom in school lessons. Participant observation in the seventh and eight form. Ethnography and Education, 2, 93–108. doi:10.1080/17457820601159133.
Friedman, J., & diSessa, A. (1999). What students should know about technology: The case of scientific visualization. Science Education and Technology, 8, 175–195. doi:10.1023/A:1009404212653.
Gibbs, P. (2011). The concept of profound boredom: Learning from moments of vision. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 30, 601–613. doi:10.1007/s11217-011-9256-5.
Hastrup, K. (2004). Getting it right: Knowledge and evidence in anthropology. Anthropological Theory, 4(4), 455–472. doi:10.1177/1463499604047921.
Højgaard, L., & Søndergaard, D. M. (2011). Theorizing the complexities of discursive and material subjectivity: Agential realism and poststructural analyses. Theory and Psychology, 21(3), 338–354. doi:10.1177/0959354309359965.
Juelskjær, M., Staunæs, D., & Rather, H. (2013). The return of the Freudian Couch®: managing affectivity through technologies of comfort. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(3), 1132–1152. doi:10.1080/09518398.2013.816885.
Juelskjær, M., & Swennesen, N. (2012). Intra-active entanglements: An interview with Karen Barad. Kvinder, Koen og Forskning, 21, 10–23.
Lave, J. (1996). Teaching as learning, in practice. Mind, Culture and Activity, 3(3), 149–164. doi:10.1207/s15327884mca0303_2.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (2003). [1991] Situeret læring og andre tekster. Hans Reitzels forlag: København.
Mansikka, J. E. (2008). Can boredom educate us? Tracing a mood in Heidegger’s fundamental ontology from an educational point of view. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 28, 255–268. doi:10.1007/s11217-008-9116-0.
McWilliam, E. (2005). Schooling the yuk/wow generation. Australian Council for Educational Research. Retrieved January 29, 2014, from http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=apc_monographs
Mol, A., & Law, J. (2002). Complexities: An introduction. In A. Mol & J. Law (Eds.), Complexities: Social studies of knowledge practices. Durham: Duke University Press.
Riis, S. (2012). Klasseværelset som eksperimentarium for nye teknologier [The classroom as exploratorium for new technologies].In K. Søndergaard & C. Hasse (Eds.) Teknologiforståelse - på skoler og hospitaler [Technological literacy - at schools and hospitals]. Copenhagen: Aarhus Universitetsforlag.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27, 4–13. doi:10.3102/0013189X027002004.
Sørensen, E. (2009). The materiality of learning—technology and knowledge in educational practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Suchman, L. (2012). Configuration. In C. Lury & N. Wakeford (Eds.), Inventive methods (pp. 48–60). London: Routledge.
Tay, L. Y., & Lim, C. P. (2012). The rules of the game. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7, 813–819. doi:10.1007/s11422-012-9464-5.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Lead Editor: C. Quigley
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kamstrupp, A.K. The wow-effect in science teacher education. Cult Stud of Sci Educ 11, 879–897 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9684-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9684-6