Abstract
There is growing interest in the construct of “transduction”, first introduced by (Kress, Cope and Kalantzis (eds), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures pp.153 – 161, Routledge, 2000), p. 159) to name how meanings in one mode are remade in another. Science educators now broadly agree that students need to learn how to interpret, make, co-ordinate and integrate meanings in multimodal representations of scientific claims. The question of how exactly this transductive capability is enabled, constrained or theorised is receiving renewed attention. In this paper, following a pragmatist socio-cultural perspective, we propose that transduction in science entails creative reasoning enabled by both cognitive and semiotic resources. We claim that that this process entails students achieving both complementarity as well as coherence or consistency of meanings across modes, but is not reducible to mono-modal “translation” of a singular meaning. Because different modes do different work in meaning-making in science, we claim instead that transduction is the process of seeking and recognising both reiteration and complementarity of linguistic and non-linguistic meanings that constitute the nature of concepts and processes in science. While this “content” can be re-represented in verbal shorthand, science meaning-making and discourse are not reducible to this mode. We draw on relevant literature and two indicative examples of student representation construction to support our case. We focus on how students attend to correspondence and coherence requirements to transduce meanings across modes. In our micro-ethnographic analyses of students’ collaborative reasoning on the topic of astronomy, we interpret data from multiple video and audio capture. Students use 3D models, 2D representations, gesture and talk as semiotic resources to reason about scientific concepts.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Erickson, F. (2006). Definition and analysis of data from videotape: some research procedures and their rationales. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 177–205). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ferguson, J., Aranda, G., Tytler, R., & Gorur, R. (2019). Video research—Purposeful selection from rich data sets. In L. Xu, G. Aranda, & D. Clarke (Eds.), Video-based research in education—Cross-disciplinary perspectives (pp. 124–139). Oxon, England: Routledge.
Gibson, J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin.
Halliday, M. (1978). Language as social semiotic. Edward Arnold.
Jewitt, C., Kress, G., Ogborn, J., & Tsartsarelis, C. (2001). Exploring learning through visual, actional and linguistic communication: The multimodal environment of science classroom. Educational Review, 1, 6–16.
Kress, G. (2000). Design and transformation: New theories of meaning. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures pp.153 – 161. Routledge.
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Kress, G. (2005). Gains and losses: New forms of texts, knowledge, and learning. Computers and Composition, 22, 5–22.
Lemke, J. (1998). Multiplying meaning: Visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science (pp. 87–113). Routledge.
Lemke, J. (2003). Mathematics in the middle: Measure, picture, gesture, sign, and word. In M. Anderson, A. Saenz-Ludlow, S. Zellweger, & V. V. Cifarelli (Eds.), Educational perspective on mathematics as semiosis: From thinking to interpreting to knowing (pp. 215–234). Legas.
Lemke, J. (2015). Feeling and meaning: A unitary bio-semiotic account. In P. Trifonas (Ed.), International handbook of semiotics (pp. 589–616). Springer.
Marton, F., & Pang, M.-F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 193–220. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1502_2
Newfield, D. (2014). Transformation, transduction and the transmodal moment. In C. Jewitt (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (pp. 100–113). Routledge.
Poulsen, S. V. (2017). The ‘same’ meaning across modes? Some reflections on transduction as translation. In O. Seisov & J. Wildfeuer (Eds.), New studies in multimodality: conceptual and methodological elaborations (pp. 37–65). Bloomsbury Academic.
Peirce, C. S. (1955). Logic as semiotic: The theory of signs. In J. Buchler (Ed.), Philosophical writings of Peirce. Dover.
Peirce, C. S. (1998). The essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings (Vol. 2). Indiana University Press.
Peirce, C.S. (1931–58). Collected papers. Vol.1–8. Vols. 1–6 edited by Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss; vols 7–8 edited by A.W. Burks : Harvard University Press.
Prain, V. (2019). Future research in learning with, through and from scientific representations. In V. Prain & B. Hand (Eds.), Theorizing the Future of Science Education Research (pp. 151–168). Springer.
Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2012). Learning through constructing representations in science: Aframework of representational construction affordances. International Journal of Science Education, 34(17), 2751–2773.
Saussure, F. de (1916/1983). Cours de linguistique générale, Paris: Éditions Payot, translated (1983) by R. Harris as Course in General Linguistics, Duckworth.
Stein, P. (2008). Multimodal pedagogies in diverse classroom: Representation, rights and resources. Routledge.
Svensson, K., & Eriksson, U. (2020). Concept of a transductive link. Physical Review: Physics Education Research, 16, 026101.
Tytler, R., Prain, V., Aranda, G., Ferguson, J., & Gorur, R. (2020). Drawing to reason and learn in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57, 209–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21590.
Volkwyn, T. S. (2020) Learning physics through transduction: A social semiotic approach. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. http://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1475470&dswid=6869. Accessed 28 July 2021.
Volkwyn, T. S., Airey, J., Gregorčič, B., & Heijkenskjöld, F. (2019). Transduction and science learning: Multimodality in the physics laboratory. Designs for Learning, 11(1), 16–29. https://doi.org/10.16993/dfl.118
Volkwyn, T. S., Airey, J., Gregorčič, B., & Linder, C. (2020). Learning to use coordinate systems in physics. European Journal of Physics., 41, 045701. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6404/ab8b54
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Prain, V., Tytler, R. Theorising Learning in Science Through Integrating Multimodal Representations. Res Sci Educ 52, 805–817 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-10025-7
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-10025-7