A Framework for Monitoring Prosocial Classroom Environments

• In Event: 26.026 - Expanding Frameworks for Talk in Science Classrooms

Abstract

Objective
Core talk moves have been identified supporting meaningful learning of science concepts, science discourse practices, and democratic participation (Michaels et al, 2010; Windschitl et al, 2012). Yet, effective realization of these talk moves is more than mechanistic enactment of discourse strategies –it is dependent on the inter-relationships of students and their perceptions of their place in the classroom environment (Michaels et al, 2010). Thus, environments that select for cooperation are critical to realization of pedagogy described in the K-12 Framework for Science Education because it rests on students taking considerable ownership of the environment. Characteristics and influence of cooperation are well-established (Johnson & Johnson, 2009) and an observation protocol has been developed to examine cooperative learning activities (Kern, Moore, & Akillioglu, 2007). Examinations of cooperative learning, however, typically focus on specific activities. We seek to build on these efforts by reporting initial work on an observation framework to identify characteristics of effective groups at the classroom level.

Theoretical Framework
Human ideas are a key resource that can be leveraged in learning and these resources can be optimally used. From this premise, we draw on design principles for effective use of common pool resources among communities (Ostrum, 1990), and the recent generalization of Ostrum’s principles across a range of human endeavors –including education (Wilson, Ostrum, & Cox, 2013). Effective groups incorporate: (a) clear group definition, (b) reasonable cost/benefit ratio, (c) collective decision making, (d) monitoring adherence to group parameters, (e) graduated sanctions, (f) conflict resolution mechanisms, (g) autonomy of subgroups within larger systems, and (h) coordination among relevant groups. These characteristics align with Johnson and Johnson’s (2009) essential elements to cooperation. We have chosen to work from Ostrum’s design principles because her descriptors offer easier adaptation to the general classroom ecology.

Method
Initial codes were developed based off of detailed descriptions of the design principles and used to code two videos from two exemplar teachers. Exemplars provided the best chance to witness the design principles in classrooms. Codes and definitions were discussed in an attempt to ensure alignment to the design principles, clear definitions, and a high degree of objectivity. Changes were made including: collapsing similar codes, eliminating highly inferential codes, refining definitions, and expanding codes to increase precision. Two subsequent rounds of revisions occurred after coding an additional five videos (including non-exemplars) before arriving at the current framework.

Results
Four of the eight design principles were not identifiable with fidelity and were discarded. This initial Prosocial Classroom Environment Observation framework (PCEOF) focuses on (a) Clear group definition, (b) Collective decision making, (c) Monitoring adherence to group parameters, and (d) Conflict resolution mechanisms. Specific codes under these broad families and examples from transcripts will be presented.

Significance
The PCEOF offers an alternative lens for examining classroom practice –one emphasizing classroom ecology, which influences the effectiveness of core talk moves. Further, it draws on findings across multiple fields of study, opening the door to triangulation with metrics from outside science education.

Authors

• Andy R. Cavagnetto, Washington State University

• Kiera McMenimen, Washington State University

• Troy Reardon, Washington State University

• Luke Conley, Pullman High School

• Brian Hand, University of Iowa