Rethinking diversity in learning science: The logic of everyday sense‐making

Abstract

There are many ways to understand the gap in science learning and achievement separating low‐income, ethnic minority and linguistic minority children from more economically privileged students. In this article we offer our perspective. First, we discuss in broad strokes how the relationship between everyday and scientific knowledge and ways of knowing has been conceptualized in the field of science education research. We consider two dominant perspectives on this question, one which views the relationship as fundamentally discontinuous and the other which views it as fundamentally continuous. We locate our own work within the latter tradition and propose a framework for understanding the everyday sense‐making practices of students from diverse communities as an intellectual resource in science learning and teaching. Two case studies follow in which we elaborate this point of view through analysis of Haitian American and Latino students' talk and activity as they work to understand metamorphosis and experimentation, respectively. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of this new conceptualization for research on science learning and teaching. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 38: 529–552, 2001

The scientific method and scientific inquiry: Tensions in teaching and learning

“…Many researchers have emphasized the central role of substantive argumentation in scientiÞc inquiry (Hammer & van Zee, 2006;Kelly & Takao, 2002;Warren and Rosebery, 1995;Warren et al, 2001). In this work, scientiÞc argumentation is characterized by use of scientiÞc evidence and reasoning to support, evaluate, and modify one's own and others' claims.…”

“…understand and construct scientiÞc ideas, practices that cannot be formalized into a rigid "method." Such practices include mechanistic reasoning, model-based reasoning, scientiÞc argumentation, and sense making (Hammer, Russ, Mikeska, & Scherr, 2005;Lehrer & Schauble, 2004;Warren, Ballenger, Ogonowski, & Roseberry, 2001).…”

“…Hammer et al (2005) found that even elementary students were able to generate mechanistic reasoning for prediction and explanation, distinguish different ideas, appreciate consistency in reasoning, and value replication. Warren et al (2001) gave an account of how students from diverse communities made sense of science when engaging in everyday sense-making talk. Warren and Rosebery (1995) linked such sense-making activities with scientiÞc argumentation, suggesting that argumentative interactions can contribute to a clearer sense of scientiÞc accountability.…”

“…To recognize productive inquiry practices in the science classroom, we conducted critical analysis of classroom interactions, including those carried out in everyday language (Warren et al, 2001); by our deÞnition, inquiry need not involve formal scientiÞc terminology.…”

Tiedeopetuksen muuttuvat tavoitteet

“…Oppiainelähtöisen autenttisuuden ja henkilökohtaisen relevanssin välinen jännite ilmenee molempien käsitteiden ympärillä käytävässä keskustelussa. Toisaalta on osallistettava oppijat opittaviin sisältöihin, toisaalta on huolehdittava sisäl-töjen oppiainelähtöisestä (disiplinäärisesta) autenttisuudesta (Hammer, 1997;Kapon, Laherto & Levrini, 2016;Warren, Ballenger, Ogonowski, Rosebery, & Hudicourt-Barnes, 2001). …”