Abstract
In this study, we embark on an exploration and analysis of a community of learners of science in a classroom of one of the authors (Barbara Luster)—a group of Year 8 African American girls and boys in an urban, inner-city school. This study is a collaborative action research project that examines closely the practice of teaching and learning science within a socio-cultural perspective that Barbara has espoused and brought to her classroom. We study the two dimensions of a community of learners—social-organisational, and intellectual-thematic—and how each evolved and influenced the other. As we explore these dimensions we pay particular attention to the gender of the students, looking for similarities and differences between boys and girls in the patterns that emerge. Our findings indicate that in Barbara's class the relative success of the learning community in terms of the social-organisational dimension was not accompanied by a relative success in the intellectual-thematic dimension. Barbara and her students, for the most part, succeeded in developing a community of people coming together to ask questions, offer their thinking, and respectfully sometimes build on each other's contributions and sometimes disagree with each other. However, Barbara and her students did not quite succeed in developing shared understandings, and we discuss the reasons for this.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Clewell, B. C., & Ginorio, A. B. (1996). Examining women's progress in the sciences from the perspective of diversity. In C. S. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus, & P. M. Rayman (Eds.),The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp. 163–231). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cobb, P. (1995). Mathematical learning and small group interaction: Four case studies. In P. Cobb, & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.),The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures (pp. 25–130). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom.Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.
Duschl, R. A. (1990).Restructuring science education: The importance of theories and their development. New York: Teachers College.
Edelsky, C. (1993). Who's got the floor? In D. Tannen (Ed.),Gender and conversational interaction (pp. 189–227). New York: Oxford University.
Erickson, F. (1996). Going for the zone: The social and cognitive ecology of teacher-student interaction in classroom conversations. In D. Hicks (Ed.),Discourse, learning and schooling (pp. 29–62). New York: Cambridge University.
Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In C. Geertz, The interpretation of cultures (pp. 3–30). New York: Basic Books.
Hollenshead, C. S., Wenzel, S. A., Dykens, M. N., Davis, C. S., Ginorio, A. B., Lazarus, B. B., & Rayman, P. M. (1996). Ensuring educational and career equity for women: A research and policy agenda. In C. S. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus, & P. M. Rayman (Eds.),The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp. 321–333). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Holton, G. (1988).Thematic origins of scientific thought: Kepler to Einstein. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Kahle, J. B. (1996). Opportunities and obstacles: Science education in the schools. In C. S. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus, & P. M. Rayman (Eds.),The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp. 57–95). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lemke, J. L. (1990).Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985).Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Martin, J. R. (1991). What should science educators do about the gender bias in science? In M. R. Matthews (Ed.).History, philosophy, and science: Selected readings (pp. 151–165). New York: Teachers College.
Mendez, E. P. (1997, March).Fostering a community of mathematics learners as teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994).Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Murphy, P. (1994). Gender differences in pupils' reaction to practical work. In R. Levinson (Ed.),Teaching science (pp. 131–142). New York: Routledge.
National Center for Education Statistics. (1997).Findings from the condition of education: Women in mathematics and science (NCES 97-972). Washington, DC: Author.
National Research Council. (1996).National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy.
National Science Foundation. (1994).Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering (NSF 94-333). Arlington, VA: Author.
O'Connor, M. C., & Michaels, S. (1996). Shifting participant frameworks: orchestrating thinking practices in group discussion. In D. Hicks (Ed.),Discourse, learning and schooling (pp. 63–103). New York: Cambridge University.
O'Hear, A. (1989). Introduction to the philosophy of science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Parker, L. H., Rennie L. J., & Harding, J. (1995).Gender equity. In B. J. Fraser, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.),Improving science education (pp. 186–210). Chicago: The National Society for the Study of Education.
Richmond, G., & Striley, J. (1996). Meaning making in classrooms: Social processes in small-group discourse and scientific knowledge building.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 839–858.
Rogoff, B., Matusov, E., & White, C. (1996). Models of teaching and learning: Participation in a community of learners. In D. R. Olson, & N. Torrance (Eds.),The handbook of education and human development: New models of learning, teaching, and schooling (pp. 388–414). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Rosser, S. V. (1990).Female friendly science. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.
Rosser, S. V. (1997).Re-engineering female friendly science. New York: Teachers College.
Roychoudhury, A., Tippins, D. J., & Nichols, S. E. (1995). Gender-inclusive science teaching: A feminist-constructivist approach.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(9), 897–924.
Sadker, M., & Sadker, D. (1994).Failing at fairness: How our schools cheat girls. New York: Touchstone.
Shulman, L. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 3–36). New York: Macmillan.
Simonson, S. D. (1995). Multiculturalism in the middle school: One aspect of a community of learners.Multicultural Review, September, 36–42.
Varelas, M. (1996). Between theory and data in a 7th grade science class.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(3), 229–263.
Varelas, M., & Becker, J. (1997). Internalization of cultural forms of behavior: Semiotic aspects of intellectual development. In B. D. Cox, & C. Lightfoot (Eds.),Sociogenetic perspectives on internalization (pp. 203–219). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Varelas, M., Luster, B., Wenzel, S., & Liao, J. (in preparation).Girls and boys constructing scientific knowledge: Inquiry into a 6th grade urban classroom.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber, & A. S. Carton (Eds.),The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (Vol. 1): Problems of general psychology (N. Minick, Trans.). New York: Plenum Press. (Original work published 1934)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Varelas, M., Luster, B. & Wenzel, S. Meaning making in a community of learners: Struggles and possibilities in an urban science class. Research in Science Education 29, 227–245 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461770
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461770