Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Methodology for Analyzing Science Stories

  • Published:
Interchange Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While the evidence for the effectiveness of the use of stories in science teaching and learning is strengthening in current research and literature, the intervention itself, namely, the science story, still suffers from a lack of definition and conception. The purpose of this paper is to determine the amount of narrative relative to non-narrative material in existing so-called stories for science education and to ascertain whether they are, indeed, stories, with the essential story elements present. The examples presented illustrate the wide range of writing that claims to be “story.” The general indiscriminate use of the term “story” presents a problem in the field of research and in the implementation of teaching methods. Without an instrument like the story construct presented in this paper, it would be impossible to determine whether a text even qualifies as a science story. With a standardized instrument that is defined by a number of fixed criteria, it is possible to analyze and, to a large extent, rate writing claiming to be science stories; however, in the absence of a standardized construct, there is an insufficient basis for comparison among studies in the use of science stories in future research.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The raters, besides the author, are an experienced researcher on and writer of science stories and a qualified science teacher with significant experience in researching history of science in scientific texts.

References

  • Baldwin, M., Clough, M. P., & Greenbowe, T. (N.D.). A puzzle with many pieces: Development of the periodic table. Retrieved December, 2012, from http://www.storybehindthescience.org.

  • Connors, R. J. (1981). The rise and fall of the modes of discourse. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 444–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Young, R., & Monroe, M. (1996). Some fundamentals of engaging stories. Environmental Education Research, 2(2), 171–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadzigeorgiou, Y., Klassen, S., & Froese Klassen, C. (2012). Encouraging a “Romantic Understanding” of science: The effect of the Nikola Tesla story. Science & Education, 21(8), 1111–1138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harp, S., & Mayer, R. (1998). How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 414–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isabelle, A. D. (2007). Teaching science using stories: The storyline approach. Science Scope, 31(2), 16–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, S. (2009). The construction and analysis of a science story: A proposed methodology. Science & Education, 18(3–4), 401–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, S., & Froese Klassen, C. (2012). The soul of solar energy: Augustin Mouchot. Story written for the S@TM (Storytelling Teaching Model) research project of the Lifelong Learning Programme of the European Union.

  • Klassen, S., & Froese Klassen, C. (2013). Raising interest in interest: A critical component in learning science through stories and informal learning environments. In P. Heering, S. Klassen, & D. Metz (Eds.), Flensburg studies on the history and philosophy of science in science education (Vol. 2, pp. 355–375). Flensburg: Flensburg University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, S., & Froese Klassen, C. (2014). Science teaching with stories: Theoretical and practical perspectives. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 1503–1529). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Miall, D. S., & Kuiken, D. (1994). Foregrounding, defamiliarization, and affect response to literary stories. Poetics, 22, 389–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, S. P., Guilbert, S. M., Smith, M. L., Hakimelahi, S., & Phillips, L. M. (2005). A theoretical framework for narrative explanation in science. Science Education, 89(4), 535–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renninger, K. A. (2007). Interest and motivation in informal science learning. Commissioned Paper. Washington, DC: National Research Council. Retrieved December, 2012, from http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Renninger_Commissioned_Paper.pdf.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, Canada

    Cathrine Froese Klassen

Authors
  1. Cathrine Froese Klassen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cathrine Froese Klassen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Froese Klassen, C. A Methodology for Analyzing Science Stories. Interchange 45, 153–165 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-015-9232-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-015-9232-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation