Argumentation and Equity in Inquiry-Based Science Instruction: Reasoning Patterns of Teachers and Students.

摘要

This multiple case study explores issues of equity in science education through an examination of how teachers' reasoning patterns compare with students' reasoning patterns during inquiry-based lessons. It also examines the ways in which teachers utilize students' cultural and linguistic resources, or funds of knowledge, during inquiry-based lessons and the ways in which students utilize their funds of knowledge, during inquiry-based lessons. Three middle school teachers and a total of 57 middle school students participated in this study. The data collection involved classroom observations and multiple interviews with each of the teachers individually and with small groups of students. The findings indicate that the students are capable of far more complex reasoning than what was elicited by the lessons observed or what was modeled and expected by the teachers, but that during the inquiry-based lessons they conformed to the more simplistic reasoning patterns they perceived as the expected norm of classroom dialogue. The findings also indicate that the students possess funds of knowledge that are relevant to science topics, but very seldom use these funds in the context of their inquiry-based lessons. In addition, the teachers in this study very seldom worked to elicit students' use of their funds in these contexts. The few attempts they did make involved the use of analogies, examples, or questions. The findings from this study have implications for both teachers and teacher educators in that they highlight similarities and differences in reasoning that can help teachers establish instructional congruence and facilitate more equitable science instruction. They also provide insight into how students' cultural and linguistic resources are utilized during inquiry-based science lessons.