DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Case Study on the Features of Classroom Norms Formed in Inquiry Activities of Elementary Science Classes

초등학교 과학 수업의 탐구활동에서 형성되는 교실 규범의 특징에 대한 사례 연구

  • Received : 2015.03.09
  • Accepted : 2015.04.20
  • Published : 2015.04.30

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze classroom norms formed in inquiry activities of elementary science classes and to consider about the actual problems in enacting school science inquiry. Focusing on the inquiry activity cases of two classes, the data were collected through classroom observation, student interview, teacher interview and questionnaires. Firstly, classroom norms were categorized into three categories theoretically: norms for behavior guidance; general academic norms; and scientific inquiry academic norms. The subcategory norms of each category were extracted inductively and the features, the causes of formation, and the influences on inquiry of each norm were also analyzed. Based on the analyses on classroom norms, the researchers identified three actual problems in enacting school science inquiry. First, the collective traits of school science inquiry caused structural problems in science classrooms. Second, teachers used their authorities in different ways according to phases of instructions. Third, the conflict cases were reported between general values for education and specific values for science inquiry. Educational implications are discussed in terms of the practices of school science inquiry and of the understanding classroom phenomena.

Keywords

science inquiry;classroom norm;science classroom culture

References

  1. Anderson, R. D. (1996). Study of curriculum reform.[Volume I: Findings and conclusions.] Studies of education reform. US Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents; Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328.
  2. Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: what research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015171124982
  3. Barrow, L. H. (2006). A brief history of inquiry: From Dewey to standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 265-278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-006-9008-5
  4. Becker, N., Rasmussen, C., Sweeney, G., Wawro, M., Towns, M., & Cole, R. (2013). Reasoning using particulate nature of matter: An example of a sociochemical norm in a university-level physical chemistry class. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(1), 81-94. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2RP20085F
  5. Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational psychologist, 26(3-4), 369-398. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653139
  6. Boostrom, R. (1991). The nature and functions of classroom rules. Curriculum Inquiry, 21(2), 193-216. https://doi.org/10.2307/1179942
  7. Boulton, M. J., & Smith, P. K. (1994). Bully/victim problems in middle-school children: Stability, self-perceived competence, peer perceptions and peer acceptance. British journal of developmental psychology, 12(3), 315-329. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.1994.tb00637.x
  8. Bybee, R. W., & DeBoer, G. E. (1994). Research on goals for the science curriculum. Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 357-387). New York: Maxwell Macmillan International.
  9. Cho, H. J., Han, I. K., Kim, H. N., & Yang, I. H. (2008). Analysis of elementary teachers' views on barriers in implementing inquiry-based instructions. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 28(8), 901-921.
  10. Cobb, P., & Yackel, E. (1996). Constructivist, emergent, and sociocultural perspectives in the context of developmental research. Educational Psychologist, 31(3-4), 175-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1996.9653265
  11. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
  12. Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2004). Social norms and human cooperation. Trends in cognitive sciences, 8(4), 185-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.02.007
  13. Fiske, A. P., Kitayama, S., Markus, H. R., & Nisbett, R. E. (1998). The cultural matrix of social psychology. (pp. 915-981). Oxford University Press.
  14. Gutmann, A. (1987). Democratic education. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  15. Hechter, M., & Opp, K. D. (Eds.). (2001). What have we learned about the emergence of social norms. Social norms (pp. 394-415). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  16. Horne, C. (2001). Sociological perspectives on the emergence of social norms. In M. Hechter, & K. D. Opp (Eds.), Social norms (pp. 1-34). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  17. Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  18. Jasso, G. (2001). Rule finding about rule making: Comparison processes and the making of rules. In M. Hechter, & K. D. Opp (Eds.), Social norms (pp. 348-393). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  19. Jetten, J., Postmes, T., & McAuliffe, B. J. (2002). 'We're all individuals': Group norms of individualism and collectivism, levels of identification and identity threat. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32(2), 189-207. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.65
  20. Kang, E., Kim, C-J., Choe, S-U., Yoo, J., Park, H-J., Lee, S. & Kim, H-B. (2012). Small group interaction and norms in the process of constructing a model for blood flow in the heart. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(2), 372-387. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.2.372
  21. Kim, C-J., & Lee, S-K. (2005). The Characteristics of socio-scientific norms and discourses in the science classrooms: Case studies of beginning teachers. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 22(3), 359-386.
  22. Marx, R. W., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (1997). Enacting project-based science. Elementary School Journal, 97(4), 341. https://doi.org/10.1086/461870
  23. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  24. Meyer, D. Z., Meyer, A. A., Nabb, K. A., Connell, M. G., & Avery, L. M. (2013). A theoretical and empirical exploration of intrinsic problems in designing inquiry activities. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 57-76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9243-4
  25. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  26. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  27. Silins, H. C., Mulford, W. R., & Zarins, S. (2002). Organizational learning and school change. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(5), 613-642. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X02239641
  28. Song, J. W. (2006). J. J. Schwab's life and his ideas of science education. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 26(7), 856-869.
  29. Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1996). Group norms and the attitude-behavior relationship: A role for group identification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(8), 776-793. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167296228002

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국연구재단