Inquiry-Based Science Teaching under Construction: Possibilities of Articulations Between Conceptual, Epistemic and Social Domains Within Scientific Knowledge in the Classroom

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2020u687719

Keywords:

domains of scientific knowledge, inquiry-based science teaching, ethnography in education, Elementary School

Abstract

In this paper, we analyse how a class discursively constructed articulations between the conceptual, epistemic and social domains of scientific knowledge. The first-grade class studied biological aspects of an insect. For data collection and analysis, we use Ethnography in Education as logic of inquiry. Our results indicate that the use of instructional resources, organised around questions, generated different ways of articulation between the three domains, evidenced in the participants’ oral speech. The emphasis on the [epistemic+social] pair has given a more investigative character to the instructional context under construction. We also discuss implications for pedagogical practice and research in science education.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Danusa Munford, Universidade Federal do ABC

Possui graduação em Ciências Biológicas pela USP, mestrado em Biologia Genética pela mesma universidade, doutorado em Curriculum and Instruction pela Pennsylvania State University e pós doutorado na Ohio State University. Atualmente é professora associada da Universidade Federal do ABC e membro do programa de Pós-graduação em Educação da UFMG.

References

Bloome, D., & Green, J. (1982). The social contexts of reading: Multidisciplinary perspectives. In B. Hutson (Ed.). Advances in reading/language research, Greenwich: JAI Press.

Bloome, D., Puro, P., & Theodorou, E. Procedural display and classroom lessons. Curriculum Inquiry, 19, p. 265–291, 1989. https://doi.org/10.2307/1179417

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. Teachers College Press.

Cappelle, V. A. (2017). Construindo Investigações em aulas de Ciências: Práticas, modos de comunicação e relações temporais nos três primeiros anos do Ensino Fundamental. Tese de Doutorado. Programa de pós-graduação em Educação: Conhecimento e Inclusão Social da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte-MG.

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(00)00032-2

Cardoso, M., & Scarpa, D. (2018). Diagnóstico de Elementos do Ensino de Ciências por Investigação: Uma Ferramenta de Análise de Propostas de Ensino Investigativas. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 18(3), 1025–1059. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec20181831025

Carvalho, A. M. P. (2018). Fundamentos Teóricos e Metodológicos do Ensino por Investigação. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências. 18(3), 765–94. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2018183765

Carvalho, I. N., El-Hani, C. N., & Nunes-Neto, N. (2020). How Should We Select Conceptual Content for Biology High School Curricula? Science & Education, 29, 513–547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00115-9

Dixon, C., & Green, J. L. (2005). Studying the discursive Construction of Texts in Classrooms Through Interational Ethnogrphy. In Beach, R. Green, J. L., Kamil, M., Shanahan, T. Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Literacy Research. Santa Barbara, Hampten Press Cresskill.

Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in 3 part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic and social goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 268–291. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371

Duschl, R. A (2017). Designing Knowledge-Building Practices in 3 Part Harmony: Coordinating Curriculum-Instruction-Assessment with Conceptual-Epistemic-Social Learning Goals (Conferência). Encontro de Ensino de Ciências por Investigação – Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo-SP, 15 a 17 de maio.

Franco, L. G., & Munford, D. (2017). Aprendendo a Usar Evidências nos Anos Iniciais do Ensino Fundamental ao Longo do tempo: Um estudo da construção discursiva de formas de responder questões em aulas de Ciências. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 17(2), 662–688. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2017172662

Franco, L. G., & Munford, D. (2018). Investigando interações discursivas em aulas de ciências: Um “olhar sensível ao contexto” sobre a pesquisa em educação em ciências. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 18(1), 125–151. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2018181125

Franco, L. G., & Munford, D. (2020). Aprendizagem de ciências: Uma análise de interações discursivas e diferentes dimensões espaço-temporais no cotidiano da sala de aula. Revista Brasileira de Educação, 25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1413-24782020250015

Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T, Iverson, H. & Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Studies of Inquiry-Based Science Teaching: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research. 82(3), 300–329. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457206

Green, J., Dixon, C., & Zaharlic, A. (2005). A etnografia como uma lógica de investigação. Educação em Revista, 42, 13–79.

Green, J., & Wallat, C. (1981). Ethnography and language in educational settings. Ablex.

Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse Strategies. 1st edition. Cambrige University Press.

Kelly, G. J. (2008). Inquiry, Activity, and Epistemic Practice. In R. Duschl & R. Grandy (Eds.) Teaching Scientific Inquiry: Recommendations for Research and Implementation (pp. 99–117). Sense Publishers.

Kelly, G. J. (2013). Inquiry teaching and learning: Philosophical considerations. In M. R. Matthews (ed.) Handbook of Historical and Philosophical Studies in Science Education. Springer.

Kelly, G. J., & Licona, P. (2018). Epistemic practices and science education. In M. R Matthews (Ed.), History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (pp. 139–165). Springer.

Ko, M. L. M., & Krist C. (2019). Opening up curricula to redistribute epistemic agency: A framework for supporting science teaching. Science Education, 103(4), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21511

Manz, E. (2013). Integrating the conceptual, epistemic, and social aspects of scientific activity. Tese de Doutorado, Department of Teaching and Learning, Vanderbilt University.

Manz, E., Lehrer, R., Schauble, L. (2020). Rethinking the classroom science investigation. Journal of Research of Science Teaching. 57(7), 1148–1174. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21625

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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21259

Mortimer, E. F., Scott, P., Amaral, E. M. R. & El-Hani, C. (2014). Conceptual profiles: Theoretical methodological bases of a research program. In E. F., Mortimer & C., El-Hani (ed.), Conceptual profiles: A theory of teaching and learning scientific concepts (pp. 3–33). Springer.

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), 89–111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1983-21172007090107

Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., Jong, Ton de, Van R., Siswa A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003

Sasseron, L. (2018). Ensino de Ciências por Investigação e o Desenvolvimento de Práticas: Uma Mirada para a Base Nacional Comum Curricular. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 18(3), 1061–1085. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec20181831061

Sasseron, L. H & Duschl, R. A. (2016). Ensino de Ciências e as Práticas epistêmicas: O papel do professor e o engajamento dos estudantes. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 21(2), 52–67.

Seung, E., Park, S., & Jung, J. (2014). Exploring Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Understanding of the Essential Features of Inquiry-Based Science Teaching Using Evidence-Based Reflection. Research in Science Education, 44(4), 507–529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9390-x

Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant Observation. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. Orlando, Florida.

Strieder, R. B. & Watanabe, G. (2018). Atividades Investigativas na Educação Científica: Dimensões e Perspectivas em Diálogos com o ENCI. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências. 18(3), 819–849. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2018183819

Stroupe, D. (2015). Describing “Science Practice” in Learning Settings. Science Education, 99(6), 1033–1040. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21191

Stroupe D, Moon J, Michaels S. (2019). Introduction to special issue: Epistemic tools in science education. Science Education, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21512

Trivelato, S. L. F., & Soares, N. (2019). Ensino de Ciências por Investigação — revisão e características de trabalhos publicados. Atas de Ciências da Saúde, 7, 45–65.

Uum, S. J. van, Verhoeff, R. P., & Peeters M. (2016) Inquiry-based science education: Towards a pedagogical framework for primary school teachers, International Journal of Science Education, 38(3), 450–469. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1147660

Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data. Sage.

Downloads

Published

2020-08-05

How to Cite

Franco, L. G., & Munford, D. . (2020). Inquiry-Based Science Teaching under Construction: Possibilities of Articulations Between Conceptual, Epistemic and Social Domains Within Scientific Knowledge in the Classroom. Brazilian Journal of Research in Science Education, 20(u), 687–719. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2020u687719

Issue

v. 20 (2020)

Section

Artigos

License

The authors are responsible for the veracity of the information provided and for the content of the papers.

The authors who publish in this journal fully agree with the following terms:

  • The authors attest that the work is unpublished, that is, it has not been published in another journal, event notices or equivalent.
  • The authors attest that they did not submit the paper to another journal simultaneously.
  • The authors retain the copyright and grant to RPBEC the right of first publication, with the work licensed simultaneously under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows the sharing of the work with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  • The authors attest that they own the copyright or the written permission from copyright owners of figures, tables, large texts, etc. that are included in the paper.
  • Authors are authorized to take additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (for example, to publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  • Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after the publication in order to increase the impact and citation of published work.

In case of identification of plagiarism, inappropriate republishing and simultaneous submissions, the authors authorize the Editorial Board to make public what happened, informing the editors of the journals involved, any plagiarized authors and their institutions of origin.

Most read articles by the same author(s)