Abstract
The present study was designed to investigate problem- and solution-related activity of elementary students in ill-defined and open-ended settings. One Grade 4/5 class of 28 students engaged in the activities of the “Engineering for Children: Structures” curriculum, designed as a vehicle for introducing science concepts, providing ill-defined problem solving contexts, and fostering positive attitudes towards science and technology. Data included video recordings, ethnographic field notes, student produced artefacts (projects and engineering logbooks), and interviews with teachers and observers. These data supported the notion of problems, solutions, and courses of actions as entities with flexible ontologies. In the course of their negotiations, students demonstrated an uncanny competence to frame and reframe problems and solutions and to decide courses of actions of different complexities in spite of the ambiguous nature of (arte)facts, plans, and language. A case study approach was chosen as the literary device to report these general findings. The discussion focuses on the inevitably ambiguous nature of (arte)facts, plans, and language and the associated notion of “interpretive flexibility.” Suggestions are provided for teachers on how to deal with interpretive flexibility without seeking recourse to the didactic approaches of direct teaching.
But what happens when problems and solutions are negotiable, when there are no longer isolated problems which one tries to solve but problems which maintain complex linkages with ensembles of other problems and diverse constraints, or when problems and solutions are simultaneously invented? (Lestel, 1989, p. 692, my translation)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amerine, R., & Bilmes, J. (1990). Following instructions. In M. Lynch and S. Woolgar (Eds.),Representation in scientific practice (pp. 323–335). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Association for the Promotion and Advancement of Science Education (APASE) (1991).Engineering for children: Structures (A manual for teachers). Vancouver, B.C.: Author.
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1979). People, problems, solutions, and the ambiguity of relevance. In J. G. March & J. P. Olsen (Eds.),Ambiguity and choice in organizations (2nd ed.). (pp. 24–37). Bergen, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. Resnick (Ed.),Knowing, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.),Handbook for research on teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.
Harel, I. (1991).Children designers: Interdisciplinary constructions for learning and knowing mathematics in a computer-rich school. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Kamen, M., Roth, W.-M., Flick, L., Shapiro, B., Barden, L., Kean, E., Marble, S., & Lemke, J. (1995, April).A multiple perspective analysis of the role of language in inquiry science learning: To build a tower. An interactive panel and paper presentation at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
Knorr-Cetina, K. D. (1981).The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979).Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Lave, J. (1988).Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.),Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lemke, J. (1995, April).Emergent agendas in collaborative activity. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Lestel, D. (1989). L'anthropologie des laboratoires et la pratique d'intelligence artificielle [Anthropology in laboratories and the practice of artificial intelligence].Social Science Information, 28, 685–703.
Livingston, E. (1987).Making sense of ethnomethodology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Lynch, M. (1985).Art and artifact in laboratory science: A study of shop work and shop talk in a laboratory. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Potter, J., & Wetherell, M. (1987).Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. London: Sage Publications.
Roth, W.-M. (1994). Experimenting in a constructivist high school physics laboratory.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 197–223.
Roth, W.-M. (1995).Authentic school science: Knowing and learning in open-inquiry laboratories. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishing.
Roth, W.-M. (in press-a). Art and artifact of children's designing: A situated cognition perspective.The Journal of the Learning Sciences.
Roth, W.-M. (in press-b). Knowledge diffusion* in a Grade 4/5 classroom during a unit on civil engineering: An analysis of a classroom community in terms of its changing resources and practices.Cognition and Instruction.
Roth, W.-M. (in press-c). The coevolution of situated language and physics knowing.The Journal of the Learning Sciences.
Roth, W.-M., & Bowen, G. M. (1993). An investigation of problem solving in the context of a grade 8 open-inquiry science program.The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 165–204.
Roth, W.-M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1993). The development of science process skills in authentic contexts.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 127–152.
Schön, D. A. (1983).The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
Sørenson, K. H., & Levold, N. (1992). Tacit networks, heterogeneous engineers, and embodied technology.Science, Technology, & Human Values, 17, 13–35.
Suchman, L. A. (1987).Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Suchman, L. A., & Trigg, R. H. (1993). Artificial intelligence as craftwork. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.),Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 144–178). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wheatley, G. H. (1991). Constructivist perspectives on science and mathematics learning.Science Education, 75, 9–21.
Zohar, A., Weinberger, Y., & Tamir, P. (1994). The effect of the biology critical thinking project on the development of critical thinking.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 183–196.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Roth, WM. From “wiggly structures” to “unshaky towers”: problem framing, solution finding, and negotiation of courses of actions during a civil engineering unit for elementary students. Research in Science Education 25, 365–381 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02357383
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02357383