The various types of interactions that students carry out when engaged in scientific argumentation function together to move forward developing ideas and support sensemaking. As such, incorporating ...argumentation in classroom instruction holds promise for supporting students in developing and acting with an epistemic agency, being positioned, and taking up, opportunities to inform their classroom community's knowledge construction work. To foster science classrooms in which students take on active roles, argue to learn, and engage in authentic meaning‐making, the field needs better understandings of how students are supported in developing, and acting with, epistemic agency. We contend that focusing on critique—specifically, examining circumstances where students partake in this type of exchange with peers when engaged in argumentation—is a productive starting point. In this study, we characterized manifestations of epistemic agency as captured through instances of student critique during argumentation discussions in three middle school classrooms. Specifically, we used social network analysis to illuminate interactional patterns related to critique, and discourse analysis to highlight language moves individuals carried out when student critique was observed. Our findings point to there being multiple, sometimes conflating, approaches to addressing tensions inherent to helping students develop and act with epistemic agency. Our findings also suggest we can learn from critiquing practices that all students bring and employ in the classroom. This latter point is especially important when desiring to create and foster equitable learning environments, where all students' ways of knowing and doing science are appreciated, recognized, and used to support sensemaking.
For students to meaningfully engage in science practices, substantive changes need to occur to deeply entrenched instructional approaches, particularly those related to classroom discourse. Because ...teachers are critical in establishing how students are permitted to interact in the classroom, it is imperative to examine their role in fostering learning environments in which students carry out science practices. This study explores how teachers describe, or frame, expectations for classroom discussions pertaining to the science practice of argumentation. Specifically, we use the theoretical lens of a participation framework to examine how teachers emphasize particular actions and goals for their students' argumentation. Multiple‐case study methodology was used to explore the relationship between two middle school teachers' framing for argumentation, and their students' engagement in an argumentation discussion. Findings revealed that, through talk moves and physical actions, both teachers emphasized the importance of students driving the argumentation and interacting with peers, resulting in students engaging in various types of dialogic interactions. However, variation in the two teachers' language highlighted different purposes for students to do so. One teacher explained that through these interactions, students could learn from peers, which could result in each individual student revising their original argument. The other teacher articulated that by working with peers and sharing ideas, classroom members would develop a communal understanding. These distinct goals aligned with different patterns in students' argumentation discussion, particularly in relation to students building on each other's ideas, which occurred more frequently in the classroom focused on communal understanding. The findings suggest the need to continue supporting teachers in developing and using rich instructional strategies to help students with dialogic interactions related to argumentation. This work also sheds light on the importance of how teachers frame the goals for student engagement in this science practice.
These narratives explore what it might entail to begin school–university partnerships towards the goal of transformative social changes through the voices of two women scholars of color. Using two ...school–university partnerships as focal cases, we unpack the complexity, tensions, and possibilities that arise through collaborations driven by the objective to promote new and more just forms of science learning within public schools. In this article, we use three key dimensions of participatory design research (namely, critical historicity, power, and relationality) as analytical lenses through which to reflect upon school–university partnerships that we are in the beginning stages of forming. Through this methodology, we shed light on: (a) the historical genealogies of equity‐oriented work and (b) the tensions that we encountered as we strived for beginning partnerships with K‐12 schools. These narratives unveil the dynamic and contentious nature of forming school–university partnerships that always occurs within a sociopolitical landscape impacted by intersecting and powered identity markers, including those around race, gender, language, culture, and status. We provide specific recommendations for supporting education researchers who aspire to transform the learning of sciences at schools through a collaborative and sustainable partnership. These recommendations include ideas around how to collectively generate goals with schools centered on transformative science learning; attention to the role of language and race in shaping partnership role‐remediation; and creating infrastructure for developing school–university partnerships toward transformative social changes, including financial, human and relational resources, as well as new forms of recognition systems.
ABSTRACT
Argumentation, a key epistemic practice in science, engages students in socially constructing knowledge claims using evidence. However, teachers need support in integrating argumentation ...into classroom instruction. We examined teachers’ enactments of an educative science curriculum and their curricular decision making for argumentation. Ten middle school teachers enacted lessons that focused on both the structure of an argument and argumentation as a dialogic process. For each teacher, we analyzed videotapes of two lessons and follow‐up interviews. Across the teachers, we observed a wide range in teachers’ enactments. In some instances, teachers’ instructional practices aligned with the underlying epistemic goals, while in other cases the structural aspects were oversimplified and discourse norms followed more traditional teacher‐led patterns. To support classroom instruction to move beyond pseudoargumentation, we found three main influences on teachers’ curricular decision making in classes with higher quality argumentation: (1) teachers’ understanding of argumentation as an epistemic practice (rather than surface level features), (2) teachers as critically reflective curriculum users, and (3) teachers problematizing their prior teaching experiences. As a field, we need to think critically about how to design teacher education experiences to discourage the relabeling of teaching with reform‐oriented terms, such as argumentation, and instead support instructional transformation.
Research in science education with multilingual learners (MLs) has expanded rapidly. This rapid expansion can be situated within a larger dialogue about what it means to provide minoritized students ...with an equitable education. Whereas some conceptions of equity focus on ensuring all students have access to the knowledge, practices, and language normatively valued in K‐12 schools (equity as access), increasingly prominent conceptions focus on transforming those knowledge, practices, and language in ways that center minoritized students and their communities (equity as transformation). In this article, we argue that conceptions of equity provide a useful lens for understanding emerging research in science education with MLs and for charting a research agenda. We begin by tracing how conceptions of equity have evolved in parallel across STEM and multilingual education. Then, we provide an overview of recent developments from demographic, theoretical, and policy perspectives. In the context of these developments, we provide a conceptual synthesis of emerging research by our team of early‐career scholars in three areas: (a) learning, (b) assessment, and (c) teacher education. Within each area, we unpack the research efforts in terms of how they attend to equity as access while pushing toward equity as transformation. Finally, we propose a research agenda for science education with MLs that builds on and extends these efforts. We close by offering recommendations for making this research agenda coherent and impactful: (a) being explicit about our conceptions of equity, (b) paying attention to the interplay of structure and agency, and (c) promoting interdisciplinary collaboration.
Recent trends have shifted the focus of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education onto practice‐based learning, to encourage opportunities for students to engage in science ...and engineering practices (SEPs) with the goal of more meaningful participation and engagement in authentic STEM experiences for all students. However, we do not fully understand how K–12 engineering students use the SEP of argumentation to design solutions or make problem‐solving decisions. In this study, we examine middle school students’ discourse to understand the epistemic criteria students use when making design decisions and how they meaningfully take up epistemic practices for engineering, specifically when engaging in engineering design. We find that students use five epistemic criteria (nature, creativity and innovation, justification, collaboration, and the user) in ways meaningful to design‐oriented goals, even at the beginning of the school year, and that consideration of these criteria varies according to the implicit goals in each stage of the design process. These findings suggest that (i) students took up epistemic goals for sensemaking and designing solutions, and (ii) students already possessed the skills and abilities to meaningfully engage in design work, suggesting an asset view of student epistemic practices should be adopted.
PDF
