Talk Strategies for Addressing Epistemic Challenges

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

Abstract

Objective
We aim to contribute to the literature on teaching moves in science classrooms by describing how talk moves are employed to negotiate the epistemic challenges presented by classroom investigations.

Theoretical Framework
Few studies focusing on talk moves have examined which aspects of knowledge construction are made available to students and how teachers employ strategies to cope with the messiness of investigations. Gaps between observations, claims, and theory are endemic to science. Scientists transform material, particular aspects of the world into abstract statements, for example, by developing an experimental representation of the phenomenon, deciding how results are relevant, and representing them for others (Latour, 1987). Engaging in collaborative scientific activity entails building or contesting a system of “epistemic levels” that rarely progress neatly (Kelly & Takao, 2002). This produces tension when teachers employ investigations that demonstrate natural phenomena as evidence in support of pre-determined explanations. As students offer alternative explanations or see something differently, teachers must decide between opening up discussion to involve students in scientific work versus moving efficiently to the desired conclusion. Here, we begin describing how teachers address these epistemic challenges.

Methods
Our primary data source was a video record of a six-week plant growth experiment in a third grade classroom (16 lessons). The experiment involved numerous sources of ambiguity, including what plant attributes were most relevant and how to describe attributes. Both the classroom teacher and first author participated, allowing us to compare two teachers’ strategies.
We used the literature to develop two initial coding schemes, one for teacher talk moves (e.g., Michaels et al, 2010) and one for the epistemic levels at which talk moves are employed; that is, how links between observation, claim, and theory are negotiated (e.g., Kelly & Takao, 2002). Each scheme (Tables 1a&b) was refined by reviewing whole-class discussions, independently coding and reaching consensus, and applying the schemes to three videos from alternative classrooms (e.g., TIMSS video).

Results
In the full paper, we show how applying the two coding schemes illuminates both the epistemic challenges of a classroom investigation and consequential differences in ways that teachers addressed those challenges. For example, in one episode, teachers capitalized on differences in how two students conceptualized which plants were “bigger” to establish a need for definition. In others, the teacher directed students to engage in definition (e.g., asking, “What do you mean by growing?”) or provided definitions for students so that they would see what they needed to see to agree on a desired conclusion. Also, we noted two distinct approaches; one involving directing students to move “up the epistemic levels” from noticings to conclusions, another characterized by asking students to make inferences (e.g., at level 5) and then engage one another’s ideas to examine the lower levels needed to support the claim.

Significance
The paper makes visible the epistemic work entailed by engaging students in investigations. It demonstrates how teachers’ talk moves afford or constrain participation in this epistemic work and, therefore, influence students’ understanding of important aspects of scientific practice.

Authors

• Eve Manz, Boston University

• Ian Renga, Western State Colorado University