Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education (한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육)

The Korean Elementary Science Education Society (한국초등과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

An Exploration of the Possibility of Implementing 'Responsive Teaching' (RT) in Elementary Science Classrooms

초등 과학 수업에서 '반응적 교수'의 실현 가능성 탐색

  • Received : 2017.08.07
  • Accepted : 2017.08.26
  • Published : 2017.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the possibility of implementing 'responsive teaching (RT)' in elementary school science classrooms. A review of relevant literature yielded a tentative framework of RT which consisted of three characteristics of RT and example practices for each characteristic. The RT framework was used to analyze elementary science lessons on the topic of the transpiration in plant leaves. The data sources were audio recordings of three $5^{th}$ grade classrooms which included both the whole-class instruction and student group activities. The data were examined through collaboration between the teacher who had taught the lessons and a university-based science education researcher. It was revealed that the implementation of RT was limited when the teacher's intervention was focused on completing tasks; when it was out of the contexts of student activities; when the teacher provided earlier what students were supposed to find out by themselves; and when the teacher's comments were evaluation-centered. By contrast, the implementation of RT was made highly possible when the teacher's intervention induced an intellectual debate among students; when the teacher negotiated meanings with students; when the teacher connected what students shared to scientific knowledge; and when the teacher prompted students to solve a new problem. Implications about implementing and studying RT were discussed.

Keywords

References

  1. Choi, K., Park, J.-Y., Choi, B.-S., Nam, J., Choi, K. S. & Lee, K.-S. (2004). Analysis of verbal interaction between teachers and students in middle school science classroom. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 24(6), 1039-1048.
  2. Colley, C. & Windschitl, M. (2016). Rigor in elementary science students' discourse: The role of responsiveness and supportive conditions for talk. Science Education, 100, 1009-1038. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21243
  3. Eisner, W. E. (1983). The art and craft of teaching. Educational Leadership, 40(4), 4-13.
  4. Elby, A. & Hammer, D. (2010). Epistemological resources and framing: A cognitive framework for helping teachers interpret and respond to their students' epistemologies. In L. D. Bendixen & F. C. Feucht (Eds.), Personal epistemology in the classroom: Theory, research, and implications for practice (pp. 409-434). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Ha, H. & Kim, H.-B. (2017). Exploring responsive teaching's effect on students' epistemological framing in small group argumentation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 37(1), 63-75. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2017.37.1.0063
  6. Hammer, D. (2000). Student resources for learning introductory physics. Physics Education Research, American Journal of Physics, 68(Suppl. 7), S52-S59.
  7. Hammer, D., Elby, A., Scherr, R. E. & Redish, E. F. (2005). Resources, framing, and transfer. In J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 89-120). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
  8. Hammer, D., Goldberg, F. & Fargason, S. (2012). Responsive teaching and the beginnings of energy in a third grade classroom. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT Education, 6(1), 51-72.
  9. Hammer, D. & Sikorski, T.-R. (2015). Implications of complexity for research on learning progressions. Science Education, 99(3), 424-431. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21165
  10. Jaber, L. Z. (2016). Attending to students' epistemic affect. In Robertson, A. D., Scherr, R. E. & Hammer, D. (Eds.), Responsive teaching in science and mathematics (pp. 162-188). New York: Routledge.
  11. Jaber, L. Z. & Hammer, D. (2016). Engaging in science: A feeling for the discipline. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(2), 156-202. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2015.1088441
  12. Lee, H. (2013). Instruction, everyone experiences but no one knows [수업, 누구나 경험하지만 누구도 모르는]. Seoul: Education Community But.
  13. Lee, H., Um, H., Chung, J. & Shin, J. (2012). The metaphors of 'teaching as art' and 'teaching as science' and its implication in class criticism. The Journal of Yeolin Education, 20(2), 305-325.
  14. Lee, J. N. (2011). Theory of teaching as art [수업 예술론]. Seoul: Mirae Heemang.
  15. Levin, D. M., Hammer, D. & Coffey, J. E. (2009). Novice teachers’ attention to student thinking. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 142-154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108330245
  16. Levin, D. M., Hammer, D., Elby, A. & Coffey, J. E. (2013). Becoming a responsive science teacher: Focusing on student thinking in secondary science. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.
  17. Lineback, J. E. (2015). The redirection: An indicator of how teachers respond to student thinking. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24, 419-460. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2014.930707
  18. Maskiewicz, A. C. (2016). Navigating the challenges of teaching responsively. In Robertson, A. D., Scherr, R. E. & Hammer, D. (Eds.), Responsive teaching in science and mathematics (pp. 105-125). New York: Routledge.
  19. Maskiewicz, A. C. & Winters, V. A. (2012). Understanding the co-construction of inquiry practices: A case study of a responsive teaching environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 429-464. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21007
  20. Nam, J., Lee, S. D., Lim, J.-H. & Moon, S. B. (2010). An analysis of change in beginner science teacher's classroom interaction through mentoring program. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 30(8), 953-970.
  21. Oh, P. S. (2011). "Unfillable Cups": Meanings of science classess to elementary school teachers. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 31(2), 271-294.
  22. Oh, P. S. (2013). Secondary science teachers' thoughts on 'good' science teaching. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(2), 405-424. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.2.405
  23. Oh, P. S. (2015). A theoretical review and trial application of the 'resources-based view' (RBV) as an alternative cognitive theory. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(6), 971-984. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.6.0971
  24. Oh, P. S. & Ahn, Y. (2013). An analysis of classroom discourse as an epistemic practice: Based on elementary science classrooms. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 32(3), 269-284.
  25. Oh, P. S. & Ahn, Y. (2015). Exploration of discursiveepistemic mechanisms in high school earth science lessons. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 36 (4), 390-403. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2015.36.4.390
  26. Oh, P. S. & Campbell, T. (2013). Understanding of science classrooms in different countries through the analysis of discourse modes for building 'classroom science knowledge' (CSK). Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(3), 597-625. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.3.597
  27. Otsuji, H., Oh, P. S., Lin, C. C., So, W. W. M. & Lu, Y.-L. (2016). Primary school science teacher training in East-Asia: In the continuous reforming for the quality assurance. In Lin, H.-S., Gilbert, J. K. & Lien, C.-J. (Eds.), Science education research and practice in East Asia (pp. 245-272). Taipei, Taiwan: Higher Education Publishing Company.
  28. Richards, J. & Robertson, A. D. (2016). A review of the research on responsive teaching in science and mathematics. In Robertson, A. D., Scherr, R. E. & Hammer, D. (Eds.), Responsive teaching in science and mathematics (pp. 36-55). New York: Routledge.
  29. Robertson, A. D., Atkins, L. J., Levin, D. M. & Richards, J. (2016a). What is responsive teaching. In Robertson, A. D., Scherr, R. E. & Hammer, D. (Eds.), Responsive teaching in science and mathematics (pp. 1-35). New York: Routledge.
  30. Robertson, A. D., Scherr, R. E. & Hammer, D. (2016b). Responsive teaching in science and mathematics. New York: Routledge.
  31. Robertson, A. D., Richards, J., Elby, A. & Walkoe, J. (2016c). Documenting variability within teacher attention and responsiveness to the substance of student thinking. In Robertson, A. D., Scherr, R. E. & Hammer, D. (Eds.), Responsive teaching in science and mathematics (pp. 227-253). New York: Routledge.
  32. Song, H.-Y. & Kim, Y. (2016). A coevolution approach to verbal interaction between teachers and students in science classes. Biology Education, 44(1), 13-24. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2016.44.1.13
  33. The Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (2011). Science 5-1 [과학 5-1]. Seoul: Kumsung.
  34. van Zee, E. & Minstrell, J. (1997). Using questioning to guide student thinking. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 6(2), 227-269. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0602_3

Cited by

  1. 반응적 교수를 위한 교사교육 프로그램을 통한 화학교사의 교수 유형 및 장애 요인 분석 vol.65, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2021.65.4.268