The teacher's role in the establishment of whole-class dialogue in a fifth grade science classroom using argument-based inquiry

Benus, Matthew J.

doi:10.17077/etd.hpphl9b8

Cited by 3 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 121 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study builds off a previous study by Benus (2011) in which he examines how a teacher experienced with an argument-based inquiry approach supports the development of dialogue in his classrooms with students that have not previously had argument-based inquiry instruction. In essence, this study is a reverse situation in that the teacher has not previously worked to implement argument into his classroom but the students have prior experience with the approach.…”

Section: Purpose Of Studymentioning

confidence: 84%

“…Dialogue is a critical component of any classroom using argument-based inquiry because to reach meaningful consensus, one must engage in the exchange and understanding of the ideas of others. Dialogue is a generative practice where people can think together about their own ideas in light of others' thinking (Benus, 2011;Schein, 1993). When people engage in dialogue, they speak in ways that seek to contribute to each other (Isaacs, 1999).…”

Section: Dialoguementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Science argumentation is the principle method by which scientific knowledge is developed (Kitcher, 1988) and is the majority of scientific discourse (Kuhn, 1993;Lemke, 1990). The root of argument is built around interacting with one's own ideas and the ideas of others using logic, empirical evidence, and counter arguments mediated through written and oral discourse (Benus, 2011;McNeill, 2009;Vygotsky, 1978). Norris and Phillips (2003) would argue that without understanding this structure, students cannot be considered scientifically literate.…”

Section: Argumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, each person entering an argument also undergoes a personal aspect of argument. He/She personally considers and justifies his/her claim based on the evidence he/she has available to him/her; evidence that may come from listening to others, personal reasoning, empirical evidence, claims or counter claims by others, and reading from "expert" sources (Benus, 2011).…”

Section: Argument As a Personal And Social Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

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

Pinney¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I would like to thank the teacher and students that participated in this study. I appreciate the many hours of time over the course of this study that you welcomed me into your classroom. Specifically to the teacher of this study, I appreciate your allowing me insight into your development through this approach which was undoubtedly a difficult process. Your willing participation in this study and the time we spent together are truly gifts that I will always remember with gratitude. I would also like to thank my friends and colleagues whose hours of conversation while working through this study have shaped my thinking. A special thanks to those colleagues that assisted in scoring and editing. I hope our interactions continue to flourish as friends and colleagues. This study is both more thorough and more interesting as a result of your participation. Lastly, I would like to thank all my friends and family who continuously encouraged me through this study and helped me stay focused on the goals at hand.

show abstract

Section: Purpose Of Studymentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Dialoguementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Argumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Argument As a Personal And Social Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

Pinney¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“……a) to grasp scientific practice, students need to learn not only how to play the role of constructor, but also how to play the role of critiquer in the community (Ford, 2008a). …b) writing plays a crucial role not only in argumentative practice (Hand, Gunel, & Ulu, 2009;Keys, 1999;Sandoval & Millwood, 2005;Wallace, 2006), but also in the grasp of scientific practice (Chen, 2011;Benus, 2011).…”

Section: Summary Of Chaptermentioning

confidence: 99%

Dual processing and discourse space

Yoon¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to explore the development of students' understanding through writing while immersed in an environment where there was a strong emphasis on a language-based argument inquiry approach. Additionally, this study explored students' spoken discourse to gain a better understanding of what role(s) talking plays in the development of understanding through writing. Finally, the study proposed a new concept of Discourse Space, which enabled researchers to improve their understanding of the characteristics of the development of student cognition through writing, and of the roles talking plays in cognitive development through writing. This study was guided by the research question: What patterns of the development of fifth grade students' cognition over time emerge in their private and public negotiations under a teacher who is ranked as a low-level implementer of the SWH approach? This question was divided into two sub-questions: (a) Throughout a unit, Ecosystems, what patterns emerge regarding the development of six fifth grade students' understanding through writing, and b) What patterns of the development of DiscourseSpace emerge through talking in three different contexts. In order to answer these questions, this qualitative research employed a generic qualitative study.Twenty-one fifth grade students participated in this study, and six students were purposefully selected through which to further investigate the development of an understanding of science through private negotiation while immersed in a language-based argument inquiry approach. Major data sources included students' writing samples, informal conversations with the teacher, researcher's field notes, and classroom videos.Additionally, the teacher's modified RTOP scores and semi-structured interviews were used to deepen the contextual understanding of the learning environment and the teacher's instructional performance. The data analysis was conducted by utilizing discourse analysis of writing and talking.The results showed (1) students' low level of engagement in evaluation impacted their reasoning and use of sources for making meanings, as well as their understanding of the topic. Compared to the results of a previous study, students' complexity of reasoning was relatively less developed, and similarly students' use of reflective sources was generally observed relatively less often. (2) The teacher and students in this study engaged in limited public negotiation, which focused more on articulating than on evaluating ideas. The limited public negotiation that was represented by the dialogical patterns in this study cannot support the development of understanding through writing or the practice of the roles of constructor and critiquer, which play a core function in the comprehension of scientific practice.This study has several implications for teacher education and research. Teacher education needs to be centered more on how to encourage students' engagement in the process of evaluation, since this plays an important function n...

show abstract

The Most Common Patterns of Classroom Dialogue Used by Science Teachers in Omani Cycle Two Schools

Alshaqsi

Ambusaidi²

2018

INT J INSTRUCTION

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to identify the patterns of classroom dialogue used by science teachers in science classes at Omani schools with respect to their gender. The study sample consisted of science teachers: three males and three females. To achieve the aims of the study, mixed methods with three instruments were used. These are an observation card or tool composed of items developed and divided into two domains: whole class dialogue and non-whole class dialogue. In addition, an interview was conducted in a sort of focus group and two lessons were video recorded. The study found that the most common patterns of science class dialogue were: teacher to student dialogue, teacher with student dialogue and teacher thinking with student dialogue. The least common patterns of science class dialogue were: student to student dialogue and all the kinds of non-whole classroom dialogue. The findings showed that female science teachers had better practices than male teachers in: Teacher to student dialogue, teacher with student dialogue and teacher thinking with student dialogue. Whereas there were no significant differences in student to student dialogue, individual work dialogue and group work dialogue, the whole sample didn't show any movement work dialogue between male and female teachers.

show abstract

The teacher's role in the establishment of whole-class dialogue in a fifth grade science classroom using argument-based inquiry

Cited by 3 publications

References 121 publications

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

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

Dual processing and discourse space

The Most Common Patterns of Classroom Dialogue Used by Science Teachers in Omani Cycle Two Schools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About