How can students be taught to develop explanations for scientific phenomena on their own when their background knowledge is incomplete or poorly organized? Evidence from historical accounts of scientific discovery suggest that self-generated analogies-analogies produced by the learners themselves-are a tool by which individuals can generate, evaluate, and modify their own explanations. The central research questions for this study were: Can students use a series of self-generated analogies to bring about change in their understanding of a given scientific phenomenon, and what is the nature of the change in understanding? Participants were asked to create, apply, and modify their own analogies-as opposed to applying a specific analogy provided by an outsider-as a heuristic for constructing, evaluating, and modifying their own explanations for a given scientific phenomena. Nontrivial changes in explanation facilitated by the use of generative analogies were observed. Changes in understanding ranged from the emergence of new explanations to the raising of important questions about the nature of the phenomenon.With dramatic flair, the ninth-grade science teacher flourishes the bathroom plunger in front of the class. Then, in one quick move, he turns and squishes it against the hard surface of the blackboard. The entire class gasps, then giggles as

This article is a response to “Beyond It Was Great” argument that dominates much of the recent study abroad research literature. This argument is based on assertions: growth in students’ intercultural competence is disappointing, and students’ intercultural competence is best developed when experts intervene and students engage in deliberate reflection. I point to results from large study abroad studies to raise questions about assertions that student growth is “disappointing” and that the interventionist approach is the best approach to developing students’ intercultural competence. I question the term “intervention” and the assumptions it carries about students becoming more interculturally competent. I describe two alternatives to the interventionist approach that have a distinctly different view of how intercultural competence develops and the respective roles of the teacher and students. I conclude that diversity of assessments and instructional approaches is critical for the future of research and practice in the relatively young field of study abroad.

An increasing number of university faculty appreciate that the role of classroom teacher offers a valuable research perspective ( Richardson, 1994 ). However, striving to be both a researcher and a teacher presents unique and serious challenges. I refer to the Aristotelian distinction between the theoretical and practical "sciences" to characterize the nature of the conflicts I experienced as a researcher/teacher. I go on to describe how it became necessary to renegotiate traditional classroom values and expectations so that the activity of research might become a more productive part of the instructional experience. I suggest that similar kinds of tensions may be inherent to any responsible, inquiry-oriented teaching and that these challenges create opportunities to contemplate important issues about the nature of research, teaching, and curriculum.

No abstract

A study appearing in Teaching and Teacher Education (Dillon, 1985) concluded that teacher questions are likely to foil classroom discussion, whereas the use of nonquestions is more likely to foster student talk. Reexamination of Dillon's original data suggests that factors other than the syntactical form of the teacher utterance influence student talk: (a) the distinction between questions intended to initiate discussion and questions meant to sustain student talk, (b) the influence of teacher talk on student expectations, and (c) the nature of the topic of discussion as it relates to student background knowledge and interest.