Lack of scientific discourse in science education

The problem: Lack of Discourse skills in science education

Science education goals and method of instruction includes participation in scientific discourse.  The Board on Science Education (BOSE) states that scientific argumentation and explanations are part of student experience  to aid their understanding and discourse skills in the science classroom. (NRC, 2007)  Scientific discourse is emphasized in the National Science Education Standards (NSES), and the role of the teacher in the classroom is critical to enhance student understanding through discourse.   Language is used in the teaching of science to communicate the learning, the details of the structure of lessons and experiments, but also as a way to learn to speak as scientists do to each other.  Science talk in the classroom helps to explain, to analyze, to describe, to compare, to record, to ask questions, to brainstorm what conclusions mean, to evaluate and to make and  test hypotheses about the natural world.  (Wellington & Osborne, 2001) Classroom discourse, student feedback and formative assessment have all been recent topics of learning sciences educational research in science education (Gee, 2010; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Lemke, 1998; Shute, 2008; Windschitl et al., 2008). 

However, in spite of attempts to reform science education, many teachers of science do not incorporate discourse into their teaching.  Teachers are still noted to be doing most of the talking in science classes, trying to "deliver" science knowledge to students.  In trying to meet all of the science objectives, teachers may rarely ask students to share their thinking about phenomena, or to help students formulate ways of talking about science.  Much of the classroom dialogue still involves teacher questioning students for the correct answer, rather than elaborating on their thinking, or asking new questions.  

-->

(Duschl, Schweingruber, & Shouse, 2007; Hardy, Kloetzer, Moeller, & Sodian, 2010; Windschitl, Thompson, & Braaten, 2008). Teachers with teacher-dominant discourse styles tend to persuade their students that the scientific knowledge presented is indeed valid.  These teachers have little opportunity or time to improve their own or their students discourse abilities.

-->

(Black & Wiliam, 1998; Hicks, 1996; NRC, 2007).

Some researchers and academics credit teacher lack of understanding of benefits of formative feedback, while being more concerned with summative processes.  

--> (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Kluger & DeNisi, 1998; Shute, 2008)   Others recognize that especially elementary teachers may have little science content knowledge and may not have acquired their own scientific discourse skills, much less be able to communicate and create the environment of true science talk.   --> (Hardy et al., 2010; Windschitl et al., 2008; Zimmerman, 2007). 

References

•Gee, J. P. (2010). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

•Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.

•Lemke, J. L. (1998). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

•Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189.

•Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008). How novice science teachers appropriate epistemic discourses around model-based inquiry for use in classrooms. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 310 - 378.

•Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (Eds.). (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

•Hardy, I., Kloetzer, B., Moeller, K., & Sodian, B. (2010). The analysis of classroom discourse: Elementary school science curricula advancing reasoning with evidence. Educational Assessment, 15(3), 197-221.

•Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7-74.

•Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1998). Feedback interventions: Toward the understanding of a double-edged sword. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(3), 67-72.

•Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27(2), 172-223.

•Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ Press.

•WEllington, J., Osborne, J., Language and Literacy in Science Education, Open University Press, Buckingham, Philadelphia, 2001.

•BOSE, NRC, 2007