Chemistry Reference
In-Depth Information
4.7 Science Operates as a Community of Practice
Another key focus found in social constructivist work is the emphasis on the
communal nature of science. From a cognitive perspective, an important idea is
that of peer review: that claims in science are validated by being evaluated by other
scientists, and therefore, argumentation becomes especially important as scientists
have to make a case to support knowledge claims they present to the community.
From this perspective, the authentic science classroom involves debate, with ideas
being constantly exposed to testing through coordination with evidence.
This may be particularly challenging given work which suggests that school-age
learners are more likely to prioritise (although not necessarily as a conscious
choice) seeking consensus during discussion, rather than critical analysis of ideas
(Solomon,
1983
,
1992
). The argument is that maintaining social cohesion is often
the imperative that channels learners working in groups, rather than critical think-
ing. However, workers concerned with promoting dialogic classroom learning have
developed approaches to shifting such patterns, through—for example—the adop-
tion of student-agreed ground rules for discussion work, so that with practice,
productive dialogue becomes possible (Kleine-Staarman & Mercer,
2010
).
There may be a
in operation here. Most students (and of
course, there are exceptions) put a high premium on appearing to be behaving in
keeping with their social group and on being accepted and valued by the others in
the group. Once students have learnt the ground rules of classroom discussion, then
social pressure can help reinforce those rules if a student transgresses. Getting to
that point may require some considerable work on behalf of the teacher. At
university level, however, students may well have the skills and metacognitive
understanding to effectively work in groups and to enjoy learning when the
activities are well matched to their learning needs and level of development
(Ryan,
2013
). Moreover, competing within groups in a
double-edged sword
'
'
context may be a
strong situational motivator. For example, the authors of a paper describing how a
board game was used in undergraduate chemistry classes to review work in groups
reported both that
fun
'
'
student enjoyment of the game and their interest in using it as a
study aid have been overwhelming
'
and that it acted as spur to informal peer
tutoring within the groups (Mosher, Mosher, & Garoutte,
2012
: 646).
Alternative conceptions that are already recognised as tenacious are likely to be
reinforced when held by a group of learners who offer each other mutual support in
terms of the reasonableness and social currency of their thinking. So, for example,
in a study reporting on learning chemistry in a higher education setting, Liang and
Gabel (
2005
: 1159) reported how
'
it was found that students seemed easily satisfied
with their non-scientific conceptions or ideas during the group discussion
'
. Simi-
larly, people may be more easily persuaded of new ideas when those ideas appear to
have been adopted by those around them (so individuals have been persuaded to
agree with clearly incorrect statements—such as which of a number of lines is
longest—simply through the presence of others who confidently maintain a false-
hood is clearly the case). If professional scientists
'
judgements can be influenced by
'
Search WWH ::
Custom Search