Negotiating the Inquiry Question: A Comparison of Whole Class and Small Group Strategies in Grade Five Science Classrooms

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of two strategies for negotiating the question for exploration during science inquiry on student achievement and teachers' perceptions. The study is set in the context of the Science Writing Heuristic. The first strategy (small group) consisted of each group of four students negotiating a question for inquiry with the teacher while the second strategy (whole class) consisted of the entire class negotiating a single question for inquiry with the teacher. The study utilized a mixedmethod approach. A quasi-experimental repeated measures design was used to determine the effect of strategy on student achievement and semi-structured teacher interviews were used to probe the question of teacher perceptions of the two strategies. Teacher observations were conducted using the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) to check for variation in implementation of the two strategies. Iowa Test of Basic Skills Science (ITBSS) (2005 and 2006) and teacher/researcher developed unit exams (pre and post) were used as student achievement measures. No statistically significant differences were found among students in the two treatment groups on the ITBSS or unit exams. RTOP observations suggest that teacher implementation was consistent across the two treatment strategies. Teachers disclosed personal preferences for the two strategies, indicating the whole class treatment was easier to manage (at least at the beginning of the school year) as students gained experience with science inquiry and the associated increased responsibility. Possible mechanisms linking the two strategies, negotiated questions, and student outcomes are discussed.

Öğretmen Adaylarının Argümantasyona Dayalı Bilim Öğrenme Yaklaşımını Yapılandırmacı Öğrenme Ortamının Nitelikleri Açısından Değerlendirmesi

“…It was determined that pre-service teachers who experienced ATBÖ process changed their perspectives on learning and made better understanding of constructivist learning. These results support the view that the learning environment dominated by ATBÖ process creates opportunities for the constructivist learning environment (Cavagnetto, et al, 2010;Hand & Keys, 1999).…”

“…Argümantasyon Tabanlı Bilim Öğrenme (ATBÖ) yaklaşımının öğrencilerin bu ihtiyacına cevap verebilecek niteliğe sahip olduğu söylenebilir. Çünkü temelinde bilimsel sorgulamanın olduğu ATBÖ yaklaşımı öğrencilerin bilimsel sorgulama içinde, bilimsel bilgiyi yapılandırmalarına yardım etmek adına tasarlanmış bir öğrenme yaklaşımıdır (Cavagnetto, Hand, & Norten-Meier, 2010;Hand & Keys, 1999). Bu süreçte oluşan bilimsel argümantasyon; iddia ve verinin, gerekçelendirmeler ile birlikte, hem deneysel hem de teorik anlamda bağlantılar kurma sürecidir (Erduran & Jimenez-Aleixandre, 2007).…”

Former students discuss middle school science journalism : a qualitative study of personally meaningful disciplinary writing.

“…For example, a three-year, mixed method study by Hand, Norton-Meier, Gunel, and Akkus (2015) that included 32 elementary teachers from six school districts and over 700 students each year demonstrated that, "critical embedded language opportunities contribute to an increase in student Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS) scores in science and language based on level of implementation particularly for elementary students who receive free and reduced lunch (an indicator of living at poverty level)" (Hand et al, 2015, abstract). The use of the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) in this study and in previous studies with grade five students (Cavagnetto, Hand, & Norton-Meier, 2011) and with younger students in kindergarten through third grade (Linebarger & Norton-Meier, 2016) have also indicated an increase in the understanding of challenging science content.…”

Arguing Like a Scientist

“…We present the negotiation model to demonstrate how to engage students in using the scientific argument structure to learn science' s big ideas through argumentative practices. Empirical studies have shown that engaging students in the negotiation model can help them develop deeper conceptual understanding, advance critical thinking skills, and promote literacy in science (Cavagnetto et al, 2011;Chen, 2011;Nam et al, 2011). It is time for all of us to move away from activity-driven inquiry to argument-based inquiry in which students can construct and critique scientific knowledge through authentic and core practices of science.…”