Analysis of Discourse Practices in Elementary Science Classrooms using Argument-Based Inquiry during Whole-Class Dialogue

Abstract

This chapter discusses an analysis of discourse practices found in eight different elementary science classrooms that have implemented the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach to argument-based inquiry. The analysis for this study involved examining a segment of whole-class talk that began after a small group presented its claim and evidence and ended when the discussion moved on to a new topic, or when a different group presented. The framework for the analysis of this whole-class dialogue developed through an iterative process that was first informed by previous analysis, review and modification of other instruments, and notable anomalies of difference from this data set. Each classroom was then rated using the Reform Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP), which provided a score for the extent to which the teacher was engaged with reform-based science teaching practices. Our analysis shows that elements of whole-class dialogue in argument-based inquiry classrooms were different across varying levels of RTOP implementation. Overall, low level RTOP implementation (little evidence of reformed-based practice) had a question and answer format during whole class talk that rarely included discourse around scientific reasoning and justification. Higher levels of RTOP implementation were more likely to be focused on student use of scientific evidence to anchor and develop a scientific understanding of “big ideas” in science. These findings are discussed in relation to teacher professional development in argument-based inquiry, science literacy, and the teacher's and students' grasp of science practice.

Characterizing the changes in teaching practice during first semester implementation of an argument-based inquiry approach in a middle school science classroom

“…Benus and colleges report (2013) in classrooms that tended toward being monologue-based they "… saw many textbook descriptions of IRE or IRF cycles (Mehan, 1979) or what Isaacs (1999) calls a 'back-and-forth volley' (p. 365)…" (p. 238). The issue is actually further compounded by most of the questions in these classrooms being knowledge level questions that did not sustain further turns of talk beyond these simple cycles unlike the classrooms that had more dialogue-based discussions (Benus et al, 2013). In their work with implementation of an SWH approach, Benus et al (2013) noted that Medium implementation classrooms tended to not be monologic in nature.…”

“…The issue is actually further compounded by most of the questions in these classrooms being knowledge level questions that did not sustain further turns of talk beyond these simple cycles unlike the classrooms that had more dialogue-based discussions (Benus et al, 2013). In their work with implementation of an SWH approach, Benus et al (2013) noted that Medium implementation classrooms tended to not be monologic in nature. The Low implementation still retained notions of monologic speech.…”

“…Sustained professional development can help teachers better use ways to approach and practice scientific argumentation. Unfortunately, this sustained professional development promoting scientific argumentation is infrequently noted in the literature and is likely uncommon in practice (Benus et al, 2013). According to Newton et al (1999), the 14 experienced science teachers they surveyed indicated that they needed more professional development time to manage and facilitate elements of argumentation.…”

“…They also found that in high level implementing classrooms that a major difference as compared to lower level implementing classrooms was seen in the persistent evidence-based wholeclass dialogue present as compared to dialogue that emerged and faded. The teacher in this setting also acted as a lynchpin by assuring that the five factors of whole-class dialogue they analyzed were ground in the conversation (Benus et al, 2013). These (Chin, 2007;van Zee et al, 2001).…”

“…This also allows students to see how alternative conceptions may arise from similar data and to develop argument skills while reaching consensus. Benus et al (2013) reported the largest change between Low-implementation and Medium-implementation of argument occurred in teacher questioning, frequently replacing knowledge recall questions with more complex questions that cannot be responded to with one turn of talk.…”