Learning to Use Evidence in Elementary School Over Time: A Study of the Discursive Construction of Ways of Answering Questions in Science Lessons





Use of evidence, Elementary School Science, Ethnography in Education, Argumentation, Science Education.


The use of evidence in science lessons has been considered an important practice to be
developed in science education. In this study, we investigate how 3rd graders constructed discursively the practice of using evidence. The theoretical and methodological framework of the study was grounded in Microethnography and Interactional Etnography. We characterize “ways of doing” related to evidence use based on the use of discursive resources: words/expressions that were emphasized by the participants in face-to-face interactions, through contextual cues of speech, such as intonation/volume shifts and pausing moments. We indicate how these ways of doing have changed over time and how participants negotiated a shared model in building answers using evidence. We also discuss methodological implications for research in Argumentation in science education and for classroom practice.


Não há dados estatísticos.


Agar, M. (1994). Language shock: Understanding the culture of conversation. New York: William Morrow and Company.
Andrews, P. (2016). Is the ‘telling case’ a methodological myth? International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(2), 1–13. doi: 10.1080/13645579.2016.1198165
Berland, L. K., & McNeill, K. L. (2010). A learning progression for scientific argumentation: Understanding student work and designing supportive instructional contexts. Science Education, 94(5), 765–793. doi: 10.1002/sce.20402
Berland, L., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26–55. doi: 10.1002/sce.20286
Berland, L., & Reiser, B. J. (2011). Classroom Communities’ Adaptations of the Practice of Scientific Argumentation. Science Education, 95(2), 191–216. doi: 10.1002/sce.20420
Bloome, D. (2012). Classroom Etnography. In M. Grenfell, D. Bloome, C. Hardy, K. Pahl, J. Powsell, & B. V. Street. Language, Ethnography, and Education: Bridging New Literacy Studies and Bourdieu (pp. 7–26). New York: Taylor & Francis.
Bloome, D., Carter, S. P., Christian, B. M., Madrid, S., Otto, S., Shuart-Faris, N., & Smith, M. (2008). Discourse Analysis in Classrooms: Approaches to Language and Literacy Research. Nova York: Teachers College Press.
Bloome, D., Carter, S. P., Christian, B. M., Otto, S., & Shuart-Faris, N. (2005). Discourse Analysis and the Study of Classroom Language and Literacy Events: A Microethnographic Perspective. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bloome, D., Katz, L., Hong, H., May-Woods, P., & Wilson, M. (2013). Methodologies in Research on Young Children and Literacy. In J. Larson, & J. Marsh, (Orgs.), Handbook of Early Childhood Literacy (pp. 605–632). 2nd Ed., London: SAGE Publications.
Capecchi, M. C. V. de M. (2013). Problematização no Ensino de Ciências. In A. M. P. Carvalho (org.). Ensino de Ciências por Investigação. São Paulo: Cengage Llearning.
Carvalho, A. M. P. (2013) Ensino de Ciências por Investigação. São Paulo: Cengage Llearning.
Castanheira, M. L. (2004). Aprendizagem contextualizada: discurso e inclusão na sala de aula. Belo Horizonte: Ceale, Autêntica.
Castanheira, M. L., Crawford, T., Dixon, C., & Green, J. (2001). Interactional Ethnography: an Approach to Studying the Social Construction of Literate Practices. Linguistics an Education, 11(4), 353–400. doi: 10.1016/S0898-5898(00)00032-2
Ferraz, A. T., & Sasseron, L. H. Propósitos epistêmicos para a promoção da argumentação em aulas investigativas. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 22(1), 42–60. Retrieved from https://www.if.ufrgs.br/cref/ojs/index.php/ienci/article/view/312
Franco, L. G. S., Cappelle, V., Munford, D. & França, E. S. (2014). Estudando o besouro rola-bosta: Uma sequência de aulas investigativas nos Anos Iniciais do Ensino Fundamental. Revista da SBEnBio, 7, 5143–5154. Recuperado de http://www.sbenbio.org.br/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/R0135-1.pdf
Franco, L. G. S., & Munford, D. (2016). Raising questions and trying to answer them: a study of students’ use of second hand data. In J. Lavonen, K. Juuti, J. Lampiselka, A. Uitto, & K. Hahl (eds). Eletronic Proceedings of the ESERA 2015 Conference. Science Education Research: Engaging Learners for a sustainable future (pp. 979–990). Part 7/Strand 7, Ed. M. Andrée, & A. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre, A. P. Helsinki, Finlândia: University of Helsinki.
Green, J., & Dixon, C. (1993). Talking knowledge into being: Discursive and social practices in classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 5(3), 231–239. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234654077_Talking_Knowledge_into_Being_Discursive_and_Social_Practices_in_Classrooms
Green, J., Dixon, C., & Zaharlic, A. (2005). A etnografia como uma lógica de investigação. Educação em Revista, Belo Horizonte, 42, 13–79.
Green, J., & Wallat, C. (1981). Ethnography and language in educational settings. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Green, J., & Baker, W. D. (2017). Interactional Ethnography as a Non-Linear Logic-in-Use: A Guidebook for Developing a Conceptually Driven Logic-of-Inquiry. In Midwinter Conference of NCTEAR – National Council of Teachers of English Assembly for Research, San Francisco State University, SF.
Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse Strategies. 1st edition. Cambrige University Press.
Hymes, D. (1974). The foundations of sociolinguistics: Sociolinguistic ethnography. 1st edition. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Hug, G. B., & McNeill, K. L. (2008). Use of First‐hand and Second‐hand Data in Science: Does data type influence classroom conversations? International Journal of Science Education, 30(13), 1725–1751. doi: 10.1080/09500690701506945
Ibraim, S. S., & Justi, R. (2016). Teachers’ Knowledge in Argumentation: Contributions from an Explicit Teaching in an Initial Teacher Preparation Programme. International Journal of Science Education, 38(12), 1996–2025. doi 10.1080/09500693.2016.1221546
Jaber, L. Z. & Hammer, D. (2016). Learning to Feel Like a Scientist. Science Education, 100(2), 189-220. doi: 10.1002/sce.21202
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. & Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in Science Education: An Overview. In M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre, & S. Erduran, S. Argumentation in Science Education: perspectives from classroom based research (pp. 03–25). Dordrecht: Springer.
Kelly, G. J. (2005). Discourse, description, and science education. In R. Yerrick & W. M. Roth (eds.). Establishing Scientific Classroom Discourse Communities: Multiple Voices of Research on Teaching and Learning (pp. 79–108). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kelly, G. J. (2014). Inquiry teaching and learning: Philosophical considerations. In M. R. Matthews (ed.) Handbook of Historical and Philosophical Studies in Science Education (pp. 1363–1380). Dordrecht: Springer.
Knight-Bardsley, A. M., & McNeill, K. L. (2016). Teacher’s pedagogical design capacity for scientific argumentation. Science Education, 100(4), 645–672, 2016. doi: 10.1002/sce.21222
Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319–337. doi: 10.1002/sce.3730770306
Manz, E., & Renga I. P. (2017). Understanding how teachers guide evidence construction conversations. Science Education, 101(4), 584–615. doi: 10.1002/sce.21282
Martins, M., Ibraim, S. de S., & Mendonça, P. C. C. Esquemas argumentativos de Walton na análise de argumentos de professores de química em formação inicial. (2016). Ensaio Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 18(2), 49–71. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/pdf/epec/2016nahead/1983-2117-epec-2016180203.pdf
McDonald, S. P., & Kelly, G. J. (2012). Beyond Argumentation: Sense-Making Discourse in the Science Classroom. In M. S. Khine (ed.) Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation: Theory, Practice and Research (pp. 265–281). Dordrecht: Springer.
Mitchell, C. J. (1984). Typicality and the case study. In: Ellens, R. F. (ed.), Ethnographic research: A guide to general conduct. New York: Academic Press.
Monteira, S. F., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2015). The Practice of Using Evidence in Kindergarten: The Role of Purposeful Observation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(6), 1–27. doi: 10.1002/tea.21259
Munford, D., & Lima, M. E. C. C. (2007). Ensinar ciências por investigação: em que estamos de acordo? Ensaio Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 9(1). Retrieved from http://www.portal.fae.ufmg.br/revistas/index.php/ensaio/article/view/122/172.
Munford, D., Souto, K. C. N., & Coutinho, F. A. (2014). A etnografia de sala de aula e estudos na educação em ciências: contribuições e desafios para investigações sobre o ensino e a aprendizagem na educação básica. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 19(2), 263–288. Retrieved from https://www.if.ufrgs.br/cref/ojs/index.php/ienci/article/viewFile/80/55.
Munford, D., & Teles, A. P. S. S. (2015). Argumentação e a construção de oportunidades de aprendizagem em aulas de ciências. Ensaio Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 17, 161–185. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/pdf/epec/v17nspe/1983-2117-epec-17-0s-00161.pdf.
National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for k12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts and Core Ideas. New York, National Academy Press.
Neves, V. F. A., Gouvêa, M. C. S., & Castanheira, M. L. (2011). A passagem da educação infantil para o ensino fundamental: tensões contemporâneas. Educação e Pesquisa, São Paulo, 37(1), 121–140. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1517-97022011000100008.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). TAPing into argumentation: developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for study science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. doi: 10.1002/sce.20012
Ryu, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2012). Improvements to Elementary Children’s Epistemic Understanding from sustained Argumentation. Science Education, 86(3), 488–526. doi: 10.1002/sce.21006
Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2008). What can argumentation tell us about epistemology? In M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre, & S. Erduran (eds.). Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 68–85). Dordrecht: Springer.
Sasseron, L. H., & Carvalho, A. M. P. (2008). Almejando a alfabetização científica no ensino fundamental: a proposição e a procura de indicadores do processo. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 13(3), 333–352. Retrieved from https://www.if.ufrgs.br/cref/ojs/index.php/ienci/article/view/445/263.
Sasseron, L., H. & Carvalho, A. M. P. (2014). A construção de argumentos em aulas de ciências: o papel dos dados, evidências, e variáveis no estabelecimento de justificativas. Ciência & Educação, 20(2), 393–410. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/pdf/ciedu/v20n2/1516-7313-ciedu-20-02-0393.pdf.
Scarpa, D. L., & Trivelato, S. L. F. Movimentos entre a cultura escolar e cultura científica: análise de argumentos em diferentes contextos. Revista Internacional de Investigación en Educación, 6(12), 69–85. Retrieved from http://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/MAGIS/article/view/7202
Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant Observation. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. Orlando, Florida.
Toulmin, S. E. (2006). Os usos do argumento. 2ª ed. São Paulo: Martins Fontes.
Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yun, S. M., & Kim, H. (2015) Changes in Students’ Participation and Small Group Norms in Scientific Argumentation. Research in Science Education, 45(3), 465–484. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11165-014-9432-z
Zembaul-Saul, C., McNeill, K. L., & Hershberger, K. (2013). What’s your evidence? Engaging k-5 in constructing explanations in science. New York, Pearson Allyn & Bacon.




Como Citar

Franco, L. G., & Munford, D. (2017). Learning to Use Evidence in Elementary School Over Time: A Study of the Discursive Construction of Ways of Answering Questions in Science Lessons. Revista Brasileira De Pesquisa Em Educação Em Ciências, 17(2), 689–715. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2017172689




Artigos mais lidos pelo mesmo(s) autor(es)