Abstract
This chapter introduces an interactional graphic tool together with a model for inquiry-based science teaching (abbreviated as IBST). The combination of the graphic tool and model offers an approach to support the planning, implementation, reflection and analysis of dialogic IBST. The potential use is illustrated here using a case study in which student teachers used IBST to develop their teaching. The interactional graphic and the model are fundamentally related to three established approaches to science teaching: inquiry-based science teaching, dialogic teaching and the communicative approach. Together, these approaches draw attention to learner participation in inquiry-based science teaching, the joint construction of understanding as a dialogic teaching process and the alternative types of talk teachers can use to guide learning in science through communicative approaches. Combining these three approaches provides a broader ‘three-pronged’ approach to teaching and learning in science. On this basis, we designed our primary teacher science course to include ideas from both inquiry teaching and classroom interaction. During the course, in addition to analysing the content structure of climate change, examining textbooks, pupil thinking and their preconceptions, the student teachers also explored the fundamental ideas of dialogic IBST in primary schools. The analysis of the executed teaching sequences was supported by the use of the interactional graphic tool which helps in mapping teachers’ communicative pattern and the extent to which the IBST approach is taking place. The potential use of the interactional graphic tool and IBST approach for the professional development of teachers is discussed in the end.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abell, S. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105–1149). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Alexander, R. (2006). Towards dialogic teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Dialogos.
Clarke, D., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 947–967.
Fajet, W., Bello, M., Leftwich, S. A., Mesler, J. L., & Shaver, A. N. (2005). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions in beginning education classes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 717–727.
Hartford, J., & MacRuairc, G. (2008). Engaging student teachers in meaningful reflective practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1884–1892.
Jiang, F., & McComas, W. F. (2015). The effects of inquiry teaching on student science achievement and attitudes: Evidence from propensity score analysis of PISA data. International Journal of Science Education, 37(3), 554–576.
Lehesvuori, S., Ramnarain, U., & Viiri, J. (2017). Challenging transmission modes of teaching in science classrooms: Enhancing learner-centredness through dialogicity. Research in Science Education, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9598-7.
Lehesvuori, S., Viiri, J., & Rasku-Puttonen, H. (2011). Introducing dialogic teaching to science student teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(8), 705–727.
Lehesvuori, S., Viiri, J., Rasku-Puttonen, H., Moate, J., & Helaakoski, J. (2013). Visualizing communication structures in science classrooms: Tracing cumulativity in teacher-led whole class discussions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(8), 912–939.
Lehtinen, A., Lehesvuori, S., & Viiri, J. (2017). The connection between forms of guidance for inquiry-based learning and the communicative approaches applied – A case study in the context of pre-service teachers. Research in Science Education, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9666-7.
Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction – What is it and does it matter? Results from research synthesis from years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496.
Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in science classrooms. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
National Research Council. (2000). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
O’Brien, J. (1993). Action research through stimulated recall. Research in Science Education, 23, 214–221.
Oliveira, A. W. (2009). Developing elementary teachers’ understandings of hedges and Personal pronouns in inquiry-based science classroom discourse. Journal of Research in Science Education, 8(2), 247–269.
Ratinen, I., Viiri, J., & Lehesvuori, S. (2013). Primary school student Teachers’ understanding of climate change: Comparing the results given by concept maps and communication analysis. Research in Science Education, 43(5), 1801–1823.
Ratinen, I., Viiri, J., Lehesvuori, S., & Kokkonen, T. (2015). Primary student-teachers’ practical knowledge of inquiry-based science teaching and classroom communication of climate change. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10(4), 561–582.
Sadeh, I., & Zion, M. (2009). The development of dynamic inquiry performances within an open inquiry setting: A comparison to guided inquiry setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1137–1116.
Scott, P., & Ametller, J. (2007). Teaching science in a meaningful way: Striking a balance between ‘opening up’ and ‘closing down’ classroom talk. School Science Review, 88(324), 77–83.
Scott, P. H., Mortimer, E. F., & Aguiar, O. G. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90(4), 605–631.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix: Lesson Plan
Appendix: Lesson Plan
Level: 6 | Time and date: 2 × 45min (90 min) 22.2.2011 | Topic/objectives (science): Climate change and its influence on the life of glaciers | ||
Summary of special education Every pupil can participate according to her/his abilities. Group work: attention to individuals | ||||
Educational and learning objectives | Learning process, content, time management, specialization | Procedure | Evaluation and feedback | |
Educational objectives: Dialogue and interaction Group work skills Stimulation of individual thinking Learning objectives: Understand the causal relation of climate change Understand the greenhouse effect vs. climate change Understand the complexity of climate change Accessing the experiment: ice cube demonstration Small group work supports the consideration of individuals and their needs | 1. Opening class: topic presentation (5 min) 2. Setting experiment (10 min) Experimental design Linking to glaciers Making hypotheses Tabling on blackboard 3. Forming groups (each five persons) (2 min) 4. First task: What causes climate change? Completing picture with teacher guidance (15 min)* 5. Second task: What follows climate change? Drawing picture based on story (15 min)* 6. Third task: How to prevent climate change? Making an ad based on given material (15 min)* 7. Synthesis: What is it? Pupils play a drama (15 min) 8. Reviewing the experiment: Is the hypothesis true? Why or why not? (13 min) *) At the end of each task, the melting ice is observed | 1. Noninteractive/authoritative Teachers present the topic of class 2. Noninteractive/authoritative Setting and explaining experiment Dialogic: collecting and discussing of hypothesis 3. Noninteractive/authoritative 4. Interactive/dialogic Group discussion with teacher tutoring Finding the right answers with teacher support 5. Noninteractive/authoritative Teacher reads the story to pupils 6. Interactive/dialogic Pupils negotiate the story and draw a picture 7. Interactive/dialogic Pupils seek information and teacher help if needed 8. Noninteractive/authoritative Teacher reads the story to the end 9. Interactive: pupils act the drama 10. Dialogic Pupils explain their observation of ice melting Discussion about hypothesis | Teachers support and encourage during every task- > direct feedback E.g. understanding the meaning of the experiment- > Why we did as we did? Evaluation new conceptualization (new drawings): Do pupils understand the connection and difference between the greenhouse effect and climate change? Has pupil knowledge of climate change increased? Do pupils understand the connection between climate change and glaciers melting? Include both individual and group evaluation plus feedback | |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lehesvuori, S., Ratinen, I., Moate, J., Viiri, J. (2018). Inquiry-Based Approaches in Primary Science Teacher Education. In: Tsivitanidou, O., Gray, P., Rybska, E., Louca, L., Constantinou, C. (eds) Professional Development for Inquiry-Based Science Teaching and Learning. Contributions from Science Education Research, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91406-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91406-0_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91405-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-91406-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)