Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

More Than Just Chemistry: The Impact of a Collaborative Participant Structure on Student Perceptions of Science

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Researchers have theorized that integrating authentic science activities into classrooms will help students learn how working scientists collaboratively construct knowledge, but few empirical studies have examined students’ experiences with these types of activities. Utilizing data from a comparative, mixed-methods study, we considered how integrating a complex, collaborative participant structure into a secondary school chemistry curriculum shapes students’ perceptions of what constitutes “science.” We found that the implementation of this participant structure expanded student perceptions of chemistry learning beyond the typical focus on science content knowledge to include the acquisition of collaboration skills. This support for the collaborative construction of knowledge, in addition to the appropriation of scientific content, establishes the conditions for what science educators and scientists say they want: students who can work together to solve science problems. Radical shifts towards such collaborative participant structures are necessary if we are to modify student perceptions of science and science classrooms in ways that are aligned with recent calls for science education reform.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguiar, O. G., Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2010). Learning from and responding to students’ questions: the authoritative and dialogic tension. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 174–193.

  • Alozie, N. M., Moje, E. B., & Krajcik, J. S. (2010). An analysis of the supports and constraints for scientific discussion in high school project-based science. Science Education, 94(3), 395–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women's ways of knowing. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bianchini, J. A. (1997). Where knowledge construction, equity, and context intersect: student learning of science in small groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(10), 1039–1065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bøe, M. V. (2012). Science choices in Norwegian upper secondary school: what matters? Science Education, 96(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. A., Reveles, J. M., & Kelly, G. J. (2005). Scientific literacy and discursive identity: a theoretical framework for understanding science learning. Science Education, 89(5), 779–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. (2009). Teaching for social justice: exploring the development of student agency through participation in the literacy practices of a mathematics classroom. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 12(3), 171–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casner-Lotto, J., & Barrington, L. (2006). Are they really ready to work? Employers’ perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century U.S. workforce. New York: The Conference Board, Corporate Voices for Working Families, Partnership for 21st Century Skills, and Society for Human Resource Management.

  • Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: the language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, R. W.-Y., Lam, S.-F., & Chan, J. C.-Y. (2008). When high achievers and low achievers work in the same group: the roles of group heterogeneity and processes in project-based learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 205–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, L. L., & Herrenkohl, L. R. (2004). Power in the classroom: how the classroom environment shapes students’ relationships with each other and with concepts. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 467–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, T. (2005). What counts as knowing: constructing a communicative repertoire for student demonstration of knowledge in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 139–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danaia, L., Fitzgerald, M., & McKinnon, D. (2013). Students’ perceptions of high school science: what has changed over the last decade? Research in Science Education, 43(4), 1501–1515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, M. S., & Bransford, J. D. (Eds.). (2005). How students learn: science in the classroom. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). Learning in science: from behaviourism towards social constructivism and beyond. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 3–25). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (Eds.). (2007). Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckert, P. (2000). Linguistic variation as social practice. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: youth and crisis. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finson, K. D. (2002). Drawing a scientist: what we do and do not know after fifty years of drawings. School Science and Mathematics, 102(7), 335–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fogleman, J., McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Examining the effect of teachers’ adaptations of a middle school science inquiry-oriented curriculum unit on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 149–169.

  • Ford, M. J. (2008). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92(3), 404–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, M. J., & Forman, E. A. (2006). Redefining disciplinary learning in classroom contexts. Review of Research in Education, 30, 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, Y. Y. H. (2002). A comparative study of primary and secondary school students' images of scientists. Research in Science & Technological Education, 20(2), 199–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furtak, E. M. (2006). The problem with answers: an exploration of guided scientific inquiry teaching. Science Education, 90(3), 453–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garson, G. D. (2012). Testing statistical assumptions. North Carolina: Statistical Associates Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gay, L. R., & Airasian, P. (2000). Educational research: competencies for analysis and application (6th ed.). Columbus, OH: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grindstaff, K., & Richmond, G. (2008). Learners’ perceptions of the role of peers in a research experience: implications for the apprenticeship process, scientific inquiry, and collaborative work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(2), 251–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hand, B., Treagust, D. F., & Vance, K. (1997). Student perceptions of the social constructivist classroom. Science Education, 81(5), 561–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrenkohl, L. R., & Guerra, M. R. (1998). Participant structures, scientific discourse, and student engagement in fourth grade. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 431–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herron, M. D. (1971). The nature of scientific enquiry. School Review, 79(2), 171–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, K., Nastasi, B. K., & Pressley, M. (1999). Discourse patterns and collaborative scientific reasoning in peer and teacher-guided discussions. Cognition and Instruction, 17(4), 379–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G., Jones, B., & Hargrove, T. (2003). The unintended consequences of high stakes testing. Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, G. J., Chen, C., & Crawford, T. (1998). Methodological considerations for studying science-in-the-making in educational settings. Research in Science Education, 28(1), 23–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, G. J., & Crawford, T. (1997). An ethnographic investigation of the discourse processes of school science. Science Education, 81(5), 533–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kind, P. M. (2013). Conceptualizing the science curriculum: 40 years of developing assessment frameworks in three large-scale assessments. Science Education, 97(5), 671–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirch, S. A. (2010). Identifying and resolving uncertainty as a mediated action in science: a comparative analysis of the cultural tools used by scientists and elementary science students at work. Science Education, 94(2), 308–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knorr-Cetina, K. D. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge: an essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kutnick, P., Blatchford, P., Clark, H., MacIntyre, H., & Baines, E. (2005). Teachers’ understandings of the relationship between within-class (pupil) grouping and learning in secondary schools. Educational Research, 47(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: the construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Longino, H. E. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumpe, A., & Staver, J. (1995). Peer collaboration and concept development: learning about photosynthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(1), 71–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundqvist, E., Almqvist, J., & Östman, L. (2009). Epistemological norms and companion meanings in science classroom communication. Science Education, 93(5), 859–874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, T. (2006). Different countries, same science classes: students’ experiences of school science in their own words. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 591–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maskiewicz, A. C., & Winters, V. A. (2012). Understanding the co-construction of inquiry practices: a case study of a responsive teaching environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 429–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, C., & Beggs, J. (2003). Children’s perceptions of school science. School Science Review, 84(308), 109–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council, N. R. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: a guide for teaching and learning. Washington DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2008). Research on future skill demands: a workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira, A. W., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). Interactive patterns and conceptual convergence during student collaborations in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(5), 634–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patchen, T., & Smithenry, D. W. (2011). More than just chemistry: the impact of collaboration on science understanding. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), San Francisco, CA.

  • Patchen, T., & Smithenry, D. W. (2013). Framing science in a new context: what students take away from a student-directed inquiry curriculum. Science Education, 97(6), 801–829.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patchen, T., & Smithenry, D. W. (2014). Diversifying instruction and shifting authority: a cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) analysis of classroom participant structures. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(5), 606--634.

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philips, S. (1972). Participant structures and communicative competence: Warm Springs children in community and classroom. In C. B. Cazden, V. P. John, & D. Hymes (Eds.), Functions of language in the classroom (pp. 370–394). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polman, J. L. (2004). Dialogic activity structures for project-based learning environments. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 431–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, F., & Lyons, T. (2011). High school students’ perceptions of school science and science careers: a critical look at a critical issue. Science Education International, 22(4), 225–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richard, V., & Bader, B. (2010). Re-presenting the social construction of science in light of the propositions of Bruno Latour: for a renewal of the school conception of science in secondary schools. Science Education, 94(4), 743–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudduck, J., & McIntyre, D. (2007). Improving learning through consulting pupils. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rukavina, S., Zuvic-Butorac, M., Ledic, J., Milotic, B., & Jurdana-Sepic, R. (2012). Developing positive attitude towards science and mathematics through motivational classroom experiences. Science Education International, 23(1), 6–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salkind, N. J. (2007). Encyclopedia of measurement and statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92(3), 447–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 93(3), 448–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, R., & Lederman, N. (2008). What scientists say: scientists’ views of nature of science and relation to science context. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 727–771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepardson, D. P. (1996). Social interactions and the mediation of science learning in two small groups of first-graders. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(2), 159–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, S. R., Hilton, M. L., & Schweingruber, H. A. (Eds.). (2006). America’s lab report: investigations in high school science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P. S., Banilower, E. R., McMahon, K. C., & Weiss, I. R. (2002). The national survey of science and mathematics education: trends from 1977 to 2000. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smithenry, D. W. (2009). Integrating guided inquiry into a traditional chemistry curricular framework. International Journal of Science Education, 32(13), 1689–1714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smithenry, D. W., & Gallagher-Bolos, J. A. (2009). Whole-class inquiry: creating student-centered science communities. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Southerland, S., Kittleson, J., Settlage, J., & Lanier, K. (2005). Individual and group meaning-making in an urban third grade classroom: red fog, cold cans, and seeping vapor. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(9), 1032–1061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swarat, S., Ortony, A., & Revelle, W. (2012). Activity matters: understanding student interest in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 515–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Syh-Jong, J. (2007). A study of students' construction of science knowledge: talk and writing in a collaborative group. Educational Research, 49(1), 65–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabak, I., & Baumgartner, E. (2004). The teacher as partner: exploring participant structures, symmetry, and identity work in scaffolding. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 393–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talanquer, V., Tomanek, D., & Novodvorsky, I. (2013). Assessing students' understanding of inquiry: what do prospective science teachers notice? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(2), 189–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toplis, R. (2012). Students’ views about secondary school science lessons: the role of practical work. Research in Science Education, 42(3), 531–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Eijck, M., & Roth, W.-M. (2008). Representations of scientists in Canadian high school and college textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 1059–1082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varelas, M., Pappas, C. C., Kane, J. M., Arsenault, A., Hankes, J., & Cowan, B. M. (2008). Urban primary-grade children think and talk science: curricular and instructional practices that nurture participation and argumentation. Science Education, 92(1), 65–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wee, B., Fast, J., Shepardson, D., Harbor, J., & Boone, W. (2004). Students’ perceptions of environmental-based inquiry experiences. School Science and Mathematics, 104(3), 112–118.

  • Wells, G., & Mejía-Arauz, R. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wickman, P.-O. (2006). Aesthetic experience in science education: learning and meaning-making as situated talk and action (Teaching and learning in science series). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008). Beyond the scientific method: model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Science Education, 92(5), 941–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, S. L., & Hodson, D. (2009). From the horse's mouth: what scientists say about scientific investigation and scientific knowledge. Science Education, 93(1), 109–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, S. L., & Hodson, D. (2010). More from the horse's mouth: what scientists say about science as a social practice. International Journal of Science Education, 32(11), 1431--1463.

  • Zhang, J., Scardmalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18, 7–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Elementary and Bilingual Education, California State University, Fullerton, CA, 92834, USA

    Terri Patchen

  2. Department of Education, Elmhurst College, Elmhurst, IL, 60607, USA

    Dennis W. Smithenry

Authors
  1. Terri Patchen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dennis W. Smithenry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Terri Patchen.

Additional information

Terri Patchen and Dennis W. Smithenry contributed equally to this work.

Appendix

Appendix

Teacher Interview Prompts

  1. 1.

    How many years have you been teaching science?

  2. 2.

    Why did you become a teacher?

  3. 3.

    What subjects are you certified to teach?

  4. 4.

    How did you obtain the teaching certificate?

  5. 5.

    Describe your educational background.

  6. 6.

    What do you think is the best way to teach science?

  7. 7.

    Describe the most important things that students learn in your class.

  8. 8.

    How has your teaching changed over the course of your teaching career?

  9. 9.

    Describe a typical day in your classroom.

  10. 10.

    What is your favorite part of the chemistry curriculum to teach?

  11. 11.

    Which part of the chemistry curriculum is your least favorite to teach?

  12. 12.

    How closely do you follow the curriculum of the other chemistry teachers?

  13. 13.

    How do the National Science Education Standards affect your teaching?

  14. 14.

    How do standardized tests affect your teaching?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Patchen, T., Smithenry, D.W. More Than Just Chemistry: The Impact of a Collaborative Participant Structure on Student Perceptions of Science. Res Sci Educ 45, 75–100 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9414-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9414-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation