Scholarly calls to reform science education for all students emphasize scientific sense-making. Despite the importance of sense-making, few strategies exist to help novice teachers learn to notice and respond equitably to students’ scientific sense-making in elementary science. In this article, we report on a qualitative case study in which we investigated sense-making moments that occurred when novice teachers facilitated classroom discussions. Findings suggest that when novice teachers made space in class discussions for sense-making—for example, by trying different responses to clarify student ideas or waiting before responding to figure out next steps—this expanded opportunities for shared epistemic authority; however, novices did not often recognize these moments as productive for sense-making. Findings also suggest that novice teachers may benefit from support to help them develop their abilities to notice, interpret, and respond equitably to students’ scientific sense-making in class discussions.
BallD. L.ForzaniF. M. (2009). The work of teaching and the challenge for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5), 497-511. doi:10.1177/0022487109348479
2.
BallengerC. (2009). Puzzling moments, teachable moments: Practicing teacher research in urban classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
3.
BangM.BrownB. A.Calabrese BartonA.RoseberyA. S.WarrenB. (2017). Toward more equitable learning in science. In SchwarzC.PassmoreC.ReiserB. J. (Eds.), Helping students make sense of the world using next generation science and engineering practices (pp. 33-58). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
4.
BarnhartT.van EsE. (2015). Studying teacher noticing: Examining the relationship among preservice science teachers’ ability to attend, analyze and respond to student thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 83-93.
5.
Benedict-ChambersA. (2016). Using tools to promote novice teacher noticing of science teaching practices in post-rehearsal discussions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 28-44.
6.
BraatenM.ShethM. (2017). Tensions teaching science for equity: Lessons learned from the case of Ms. Dawson. Science Education, 101(1), 134-164. doi:10.1002/sce.21254
7.
Calabrese BartonA.TanE. (2009). Funds of knowledge and discourses and hybrid space. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 50-73. doi:10.1002/tea.20269
8.
CarloneH. B.Haun-FrankJ.WebbA. (2011). Assessing equity beyond knowledge- and skills-based outcomes: A comparative ethnography of two fourth-grade reform-based science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(5), 459-485. doi:10.1002/tea.20413
9.
CarrollT. G.FosterE. (2010). Who will teach? Experience matters. Washington, DC: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (NCTAF).
10.
CorbinJ.StraussA. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Washington, DC: SAGE.
11.
CorneliusL. L.HerrenkohlL. R. (2004). Power in the classroom: How the classroom environment shapes students’ relationships with each other and with concepts. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 467-498.
12.
EngleR. A. (2012). The productive disciplinary engagement framework: Origins, key concepts and developments. In DaiD. Y. (Ed.), Design research on learning and thinking in educational settings: Enhancing intellectual growth and functioning (pp. 161-200). New York, NY: Routledge.
13.
EngleR. A.ConantF. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 399-483.
14.
EngleR. A.Langer-OsunaJ. M.de RoystonM. M. (2014). Toward a model of influence in persuasive discussions: Negotiating quality, authority, privilege, and access within a student-led argument. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(2), 245-268. doi:10.1080/10508406.2014.883979
15.
FormanE. A.FordM. J. (2014). Authority and accountability in light of disciplinary practices in science. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 199-210. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2013.07.009
16.
GoodwinC. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606-633. doi:10.1525/aa.1994.96.3.02a00100
17.
GreenoJ. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In SawyerR. K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79-96). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
18.
HammerD. (1995). Student inquiry in a physics class discussion. Cognition and Instruction, 13(3), 401-430. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1303_3
19.
HandV. (2012). Seeing culture and power in mathematical learning: Toward a model of equitable instruction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80(1/2), 233-247. doi:10.1007/s10649-012-9387-9
20.
HoganK.NastasiB. K.PressleyM. (1999). Discourse patterns and collaborative scientific reasoning in peer and teacher-guided discussions. Cognition and Instruction, 17(4), 379-432. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI1704_2
21.
JacobsV. R.LambL. L. C.PhilippR. A. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169-202.
22.
KangH.AndersonC. W. (2009, April). Secondary science teacher candidates’ narratives about responding to students as science learners. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
23.
KangH.AndersonC. W. (2015). Supporting preservice science teachers’ ability to attend and respond to student thinking by design. Science Education, 99(5), 863-895.
24.
KangH.WindschitlM.StroupeD.ThompsonJ. (2016). Designing, launching, and implementing high quality learning opportunities for students that advance scientific thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(9), 1316-1340.
25.
KennedyM. M. (2005). Inside teaching. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26.
LampertM. (2010). Learning teaching in, from, and for practice: What do we mean?Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 21-34. doi:10.1177/0022487109347321
27.
LarkinD. B. (2013). Deep knowledge: Learning to teach science for understanding and equity. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
28.
LevinD. M.HammerD.CoffeyJ. E. (2009). Novice teachers’ attention to student thinking. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 142-154. doi:10.1177/0022487108330245
29.
ListonD.WhitcombJ.BorkoH. (2006). Too little or too much: Teacher preparation and the first years of teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(4), 351-358. doi:10.1177/0022487106291976
30.
MaskiewiczA. C.WintersV. 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. doi:10.1002/tea.21007
31.
McLaughlinD. S.Calabrese BartonA. (2013). Preservice teachers’ uptake and understanding of funds of knowledge in elementary science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(1), 13-36.
32.
MichaelsS.ShouseA. W.SchweingruberH. A. (2008). Ready, set, science!: Putting research to work in K-8 science classrooms (National Research Council. Board on Science Education). Washington, DC. The National Academies Press.
33.
NasirN. S.RoseberyA. S.WarrenB.LeeC. D. (2006). Learning as a cultural process: Achieving equity through diversity. In SawyerR. K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 489-504). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34.
National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8 (DuschlR. A.SchweingruberH. A.ShouseA. W., Eds.). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
35.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
36.
Next Generation Science Standards Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
37.
RoseberyA. S.WarrenB. (2008). Teaching science to English language learners: Building on students’ strengths. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.
38.
RoseberyA. S.WarrenB.Tucker-RaymondE. (2015). Developing interpretive power in science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(10), 1571-1600. doi:10.1002/tea.21267
39.
RussR. S. (2018). Characterizing teacher attention to student thinking: A role for epistemological messages. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(1), 94-120. doi:10.1002/tea.21414
40.
SchoerningE.HandB.ShelleyM.TherrienW. (2015). Language, access, and power in the elementary science classroom. Science Education, 99(2), 238-259. doi:10.1002/sce.21154
41.
SchwarzC.BraatenM.HaverlyC.Calabrese BartonA.de los SantosE. (2018, March). Noticing and responding moments as windows for disciplinary and equitable sense-making. Paper presented at the Annual International Conference of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Atlanta, GA.
42.
SeilerG. (2001). Reversing the “standard” direction: Science emerging from the lives of African American students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(9), 1000-1014. doi:10.1002/tea.1044
43.
SharmaA.AndersonC. W. (2009). Recontextualization of science from lab to school: Implications for science literacy. Science & Education, 18(9), 1253-1275. doi:10.1007/s11191-007-9112-8
44.
SherinM. G.RussR. S.SherinB. L.ColestockA. (2008). Professional vision in action: An exploratory study. Issues in Teacher Education, 17(2), 27-46.
45.
StroupeD. (2014). Examining classroom science practice communities: How teachers and students negotiate epistemic agency and learn science-as-practice. Science Education, 98(3), 487-516. doi:10.1002/sce.21112
46.
TanE.Calabrese BartonA.Varley GutiérrezM.TurnerE. E. (2012). Empowering science and mathematics education in urban schools. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
47.
ThompsonJ.WindschitlM.BraatenM. (2013). Developing a theory of ambitious early-career teacher practice. American Educational Research Journal, 50(3), 574-615.
48.
van EsE. A. (2011). A framework for learning to notice student thinking. In SherinM. G.JacobsV. R.PhilippR. (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes (pp. 134-151). New York, NY: Routledge.
49.
van EsE. A.HandV.MercadoJ. (2017). Making visible the relationship between teachers’ noticing for equity and equitable teaching practice. In SchackE. O.FisherM. H.WilhelmJ. A. (Eds.), Teacher noticing: Bridging and broadening perspectives, contexts, and frameworks (pp. 251-270). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
50.
van EsE. A.SherinM. G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers’ interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 571-596.
51.
van EsE. A.SherinM. G. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ “learning to notice” in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 244-276.
52.
van EsE. A.SherinM. G. (2010). The influence of video clubs on teachers’ thinking and practice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13(2), 155-176. doi:10.1007/s10857-009-9130-3
53.
WarrenB.BallengerC.OgonowskiM.RoseberyA. S.Hudicourt-BarnesJ. (2001). Rethinking diversity in learning science: The logic of everyday sense-making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(5), 529-552.
54.
WickmanP. O.ÖstmanL. (2002). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86(5), 601-623. doi:10.1002/sce.10036
55.
WindschitlM. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131-175.
56.
WindschitlM.ThompsonJ.BraatenM.StroupeD. (2012). Proposing a core set of instructional practices and tools for teachers of science. Science Education, 96(5), 878-903. doi:10.1002/sce.21027
57.
YinR. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
