Using the Concept of Zone of Proximal Development to Explore the Challenges of and Opportunities in Designing Discourse Activities Based on Practical Work

Abstract

This article reports a study in which two researchers collaborated with five teachers to facilitate discourse activities aimed to enhance students’ learning from practical activities. The paper explores how certain teacher practices support or hinder students’ learning. Four cases from the study were analyzed in depth using Vygotsky's concept “the zone of proximal development” and Wallace's notion of language authenticity. The analyses indicated that although respected pedagogical principles underlie teaching, students’ use their own prior concepts to a limited degree to express their developing understanding of inquiry into scientific phenomena and ideas. The analyses showed how the teachers emphasized theoretical knowledge and hoped to enable the students to correctly interpret their observations and apply scientific theory. However, this emphasis hindered students’ articulations of their developing understanding. The results indicated that working within students’ zones of proximal development during practical activities requires a novel approach. Based on Wallace's notion of “third space,” we argue that it is important to encourage students to work with their own authentic language to develop a more scientific language when performing practical work.

Challenges and Support When Teaching Science Through an Integrated Inquiry and Literacy Approach

“…Their analyses showed that the teachers emphasized theoretical knowledge and language to enable the students to make the correct interpretations, but, in fact, hindered the students in articulating their developing understanding. In line with Varelas and Pappas (2006), Mestad and Kolstø (2014) highlight the importance of creating third spaces, where students work with their own authentic language during practical activities on their way towards more scientific language.…”

“…For example, they identify learning goals, time limits, visible end products, research meetings, templates, and available information sources as possible support structures. In one particular study, Mestad and Kolstø (2014) worked with five teachers to enhance student learning from practical activities. Their analyses showed that the teachers emphasized theoretical knowledge and language to enable the students to make the correct interpretations, but, in fact, hindered the students in articulating their developing understanding.…”

“…They especially highlight popular culture texts, because the students in their study relied on these texts as much as they did their own observations for making sense of scientific ideas and concepts. In a recent study, Mestad and Kolstø (2014) provide an interesting example of the importance of making connections between everyday and scientific language in the third space. In their study, the teachers started out by emphasizing theoretical knowledge and language to support the students in correctly interpreting their observations and applying theory during practical activities.…”

Representing to learn in science education: Theoretical framework and analytical approaches

“…Even though the teacher took the primary responsibility for developing the scientific account, it was grounded in the students' drawing. Thanks to this, the discussions were not conditional only on the teacher's contributions, as warned for by Mestad and Kolstø (2014).…”

Scientific Literacy for Participation

“…On the other hand, Mestad and Kolstø (2014) have shown in a classroom study how strong expectation in the learning context on providing correct explanations (authentic to science Discourses), before the students had any opportunity to use their own words, meant that students did not enter reflection processes associated with Third space. However, the team re-designed the learning context to include 1.…”