View
4
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Discursive Identity & Conceptual Continuity: Using informal science
literacy to promote students Science Learning
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Graduate School of Education
Stanford University
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
In these bloody days and frightful nights when urban warriors find no face more despicable than his own, no ammunition more deadly than self hate, and no enemy more deserving of his true aim than his own brother, we must ask ourselves how we’ve come so late and lonely to such a place.
--- Maya Angelo
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
How do the introduction make you feel?Would the talk takes on a different feel, if presented in a different manners?What features of the talk creates a different sense or feeling?Do the tones, pitches, genre, and topic have an effect on your interpretation of the message?How do this choice of genre affect your thinking about ‘who’ you understood me to be?
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
[The Language] is totally different; in other classes like in English they teach us how to talk in English. Our problem is we talk that slang, they gotta correct it from now and then, when they hear [it] .We can’t put slang in [science], it isn't no slang that can be said about this stuff. - Deja
Brown, B. (2006) “It isn't no slang that can be said about this stuff ”: Language, Identity, and Appropriating Science Discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Academic Language Learning in Science
A series of studies have suggested that one of the most influential factors that limits minority student’s learning is the conflict between their home discourse and modes of non-vernacular classroom discourse (Gee, 1999; Williams, 1991)
Science educators began to engage in research that has implicated the relationship between students’ identity, language, and science learning
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
DISCOURSE, IDENTITY, & SCIENCE LEARNING
The term DISCOURSE is used because it reflects a broader relationship between language and its many facets (written, spoken, symbolic, non-verbal).Presuppositions regarding a student’s intellectual skills, their knowledge resources, and dispositions are often signaled by their use of language.From a sociolinguistic point of view, in every discursive exchange (written, read, spoken, and enacted) speakers and listeners co-construct meaning through interactions that serve to position them as particular types of people (e.g., scientific, literate, competent) (agar, 1994; fishman, 1989; gee, 1999b).
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Theoretical FrameIntroduction Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Given this perspective, the language of academic genres offer students a way to use language to symbolically cue their identity. Yet, engaging in these discourse practices is not neutral with respect to students’ identity
Learning the content and language practices of a discourse-rich subject matter like science requires some appropriation of an identity commensurate with scientific language use.
Therefore, choices of discourse related to appropriating scientific knowledge within classroom contexts carry implications for how students and teachers perceive one another as well as themselves. The negotiated role of engaging in the situationally-defined discourses of science needs to be reconciled with students’ emerging academic identities.
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Theoretical FrameworkIntroduction Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
FOR EXAMPLE:
(a) What’s good shawty?(b) What’s hattn’in fam?(c) Greetings(d) Hi there !(e) How are you?
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Theoretical FrameworkIntroduction Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
9
DISCURSIVE IDENTITY DEFINED:
The act of communicating identity via discursive interaction provides the basis for what constitutes a discursive identity. The term “discursive identity” reflects an understanding that speakers apply as they select genres of discourse with the knowledge (tacit or implicit) that others will interpret their discourse as an artifact of their cultural membership.
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
10
Nasir & Saxe, (2003) Contexts for IdentityGee’s (2002) Identity
DomainsInteractional Developmental Historical
A B C
1 Nature Identity(A state of identity
derived fromforces in nature)
One’s identity as i nterpreteda n d def ined by thephysiological components ofsocial interaction that providein-the-moment interpretivesymbols about the type ofperson one is.
Who one is seen as be ingover time as peopleparticipate in a particularcommunity and interpret them e a n i n g of o ne’sphysiologicalcharacteristics.
Who one is seen as basedon the meanings associatedwith historical definitionsof the physiological self.The natural history of agroup may evolve throughchanges in historicalm e a n i n g s o f thephysiological self.
2
InstitutionalIdentity
(A state of identitydefined or
authorized byauthorities within
institutions)
One’s identity as i nterpretedand defined within authorizedinstitutional contexts. Initialen t ry in to institutionalcontexts creates identitypotential i t ies reflectingi n s t i t u t i o n a l d o m a i nidentification through face-to-face interaction.
Who one is seen as be ingbased on institutionaldomain identification overdevelopmental time. Overd e v e l o p m e n t a l timeinstitutional symbols maybe added, changed,illuminated, reinterpreted,as they are understood to berepresentative o f theindividual.
Who one is seen as basedon the meanings associatedwith historical definitionsof the institutional self.Inst i tut ional identi tydomains are defined by thehistorical significance ofmembership and itsassociated symbols.
3DiscourseIdentity
(A state of identitydefined by the
descriptors usedto define anindividual)
One’s identity as i nterpretedand defined by the choices ofdiscourse employed torecognize an individual duringmoment-to-moment socialinteraction.
Who one is seen as be ingthrough the use ofappropriate descriptor overdevelopmental time aspeople participate inpractices in new ways.Developmentaltransformation may or maynot reflect emerging identitytensions.
Who one is seen as beingbased on the historicalmeanings associated withDiscursive symbols useddescribed a p articular typeof person. Repertoires arealso based on the socialhistory and understandingof the group’s changingcultural capital.
4
Affinity Identity(A state of identity
defined by thedomain of sharedexperiences and
practices ofindividuals and
groups)
One’s identity as i nterpretedand defined face-to-faceinteraction based upon distinctsocial practices that sustainsgroup affiliation.
Who one is seen as be ingaccording to affinitypositioning wi th in aparticular affinity groupover developmental time.Developmental shifting mayresults from the affinitygroup’s shared experiencesand identification with oneanother.
Who one is seen as beingbased on the historicalmeanings associated withaffinity group membership.
Stanford University Graduate School of Education -Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
11
Source Trajectory
DIMENSIONS OF DISCURSIVE IDENTITY
Scale: One’s discursive identity is determined by the time scale that informs interpretation and the meaning of identity cues (Lemke, 2001; Wortham 2003, 2004; Lemke, 2000; Nasir & Saxe, 2003 ).
Source: One’s discursive identity is determined by the source of one’s identity (Gee, 2002)
Trajectory: One’s discursive identity is influenced by the trajectory of their existence within an identity domain (Wenger, 1998).
DISCURSIVE IDENTITY
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
12
VERNACULAR = ver·nac·u·lar n( 1) the everyday language of the people in a particular country
or region, as opposed to official or formal language (2) the common spoken language of a people as opposed to formal written or literary language
NON-VERNACULAR
- By default, this is the antithesis to vernacular in that it describes the type of language that is not considered “everyday language” of the people. This can be seen as official or formal language (2) The uncommon language found in formal written or literary language.
- Given that all language is socially constructed two assumptions can be made:
- There is NO such thing as non-vernacular language.
- All new forms of discourse are non-vernacular at first, then through experience become vernacular.
Stanford University Graduate School of Education -Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
13
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
13
In our 4-3 hot package, Rick and Liz will fire, but Mike is man-up on the Z
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
13
In our 4-3 hot package, Rick and Liz will fire, but Mike is man-up on the Z
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
13
In our 4-3 hot package, Rick and Liz will fire, but Mike is man-up on the Z
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
13
In our 4-3 hot package, Rick and Liz will fire, but Mike is man-up on the Z
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
13
In our 4-3 hot package, Rick and Liz will fire, but Mike is man-up on the Z
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
13
In our 4-3 hot package, Rick and Liz will fire, but Mike is man-up on the Z
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
13
In our 4-3 hot package, Rick and Liz will fire, but Mike is man-up on the Z
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
13
In our 4-3 hot package, Rick and Liz will fire, but Mike is man-up on the Z
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
14
Non-Vernacular:
In our 4-3 hot package, Rick and Liz will fire, but Mike is man-up on the Z
Vernacular
When we blitz using our four linemen and three linebacker alignment, the left and right side linebackers will blitz the quarterback, but the middle linebacker will be in man to man coverage with the tight end.
Stanford University Graduate School of Education -Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
15
NON-VENACULAR
DEFINITION VENACULAR
4-3
A defensive package that uses for defensive linemen and three linebackers.
Four linemen and three
linebackers
Fire These are plays where individuals will pursue the quarterback instead of attempting to cover receivers
Blitz
Rick
The right side linebacker. The ‘R’ in the name is signifies that Rick is the code name for the right side linebacker
Linebacker on the right
Liz
This is the left side linebacker. The ‘L’ in the name signifies that Liz is the code name for the left side linebacker
The Linebacker on the Left
Mike
Mike is the middle linebacker; The ‘M’ in the name signifies that Mike is the code name for the middle linebacker.
The Middle Line backer
Man
This refers to they type of wide receiver coverage that the “Mike” linebacker is assigned. This coverage requires Mike to follow the Tight End wherever he goes.
Man to Man coverage
Z
This is the symbol designated for the Tight End. The Tight end
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
16
ANALYSIS METHODSa) Construction of Event Maps to examine patterns of
classroom discourse (Green & Wallat, 1981)
b) Domain Analysis of emergent patterns of classroom talk (Spradley, 1980)
c) Critical Discourse Analysis of emergent patterns of classroom talk to explore patterns of micro-level discourse (Green & Wallat, 1981)
• Phase Units = maps how macrostructure of talk accomplishes classroom activities.
• Sequences Units = maps how individual segments of talk organize classroom activity.
• Message Units = maps how the tone, pace, and genre of talk was used in a speech act.
• Action Units = provides an analytical map of what discourse activities were accomplished
Stanford University Graduate School of Education -Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction: What lies beneath an incorrect answer?
Students’ master a variety of complex languages and ideas.One wonders how young people who master complex languages and ideas struggle with science learning?
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Theoretical Framework: Science Education & Informal Learning
Science Education has offered numerous studies of students’ informal learning (diSessa, 1983, 2002)
Several of these frameworks examine students’ intuitive ways of coming to understand the world (diSessa, 2002; Smith et al.,1994)
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Theoretical Framework: Conceptual Change
Conceptual Change emerged as the preeminent science education framework for students’ learning (Posner & Strike, 1992). Other scholars argued for a more constructivist position on students’ learning (diSessa, 1994, Ueno, 2006)diSessa offered P-Prims an alternative way to viewUeno (2006) offered a recent extension to this work by arguing for a situated learning approach to viewing students’ learning.
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Introduction: A linguistic Extension
Linguistic resources made available to a group of people shape their cultural and intellectual behaviors (Lakoff, 1993; Whorf, 1956). Appropriation of different languages can be seen as an appropriation of an alternative worldview (Agar, 1994; Gethin 1999). As individuals are constrained to a singular discursive practice, they are necessarily locked into the worldview made available by their mode of normative discourse.
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
21
TABLE 1
00:29:53 Student asks questions about elements 00:37:13 Lecture continues 00:43:45 Potential Divergence: Students in back are talking, teacher tells students to stop talking 00:55:18 Lecture continues 01:02:19 Teacher asks a question about atomic structure. 01:03:49 Student-Teacher Discussion of atomic structure 01:04:45 Lights turn on; notes are finished, still talking about the test. 01:05:29 Students are instructed to return to lab stations and begin reading lab instructions 01:06:40 Teacher gives the homework assignment and the assignment on the lab write-up for the night.
BUILDING THE EVENT MAP: LEVEL ONE SEQUENCE IDENTIFICATION
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
22
Time Phase Sequence – Description Ongoing Sequence 00:00:00 Pre-Class
Activities
Tape Begins
00:00:06 T directs student to review the words on the board [word wall] 00:00:11 T asks Danielle to read the words 00:00:14 Danielle reads the words
Need code for teacher directing and student providing the requested behavior.
00:00:21
Introduction of Word Wall T affirms students’ familiarity with the words
00:00:30 T poses question to students re: classification [Establish the Problem] 00:00:41 T calls on Dorian to answer the question 00:00:42 Dorian answers question re: Classification problems 00:00:59 T restates his answe r
TIDQ - 3
00:01:15 T calls on Darrell for further explanation 00:01:17 Darrell gives his answer to the problem. 00:01:38 T asks Dorian for further explanation
TIDQ 5
00:01:41 Dorian gives his answer [living v. non-living] re: categorizing words. 00:01:56 T rephrases the answer
TIDQ - 3
00:01:58 T asks Dorian to group the words into his categories. 00:01:58 Dorian gives his answer. 00:02:07 T validates answer 00:02:08
Discussion of Scientists Studying a Variety of Things
Tasks Joshua to elaborate
Need new category – t asks a question, then validation, & asks for ELABORATION from students TIDQ –2 ?
00:02:20 T gives students directions asks them to list what makes something living or non-living 00:02:42 T repeats directions 00:03:37 T gives the students a tip for writing their responses. 00:04:41 T gives additional directions. 00:05:30
Pre-Assessment Writing:
Characteristics of Living Things
T asks Shanice to repeat the directions
DIRECTIONS
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
23
LEVEL 1 SEQUENCE UNIT
TYPE CODE N DESCRIPTION
QUESTION Q 74 These sequences involve the teacher or student posing queries to members of the classroom (students or teachers).
RESPONSE R 67 These sequences involve discursive exchanges involving the speaker providing commentary in response to a question.
REVIEW RV 26 These discursive exchange s involve the speak er discussing concepts that have previously been discussed in the classroom.
PRAISE PR 7 These discursive exchanges involve the speaker recognizing the quality of another speaker’s comments.
DIRECTION DR 27 These discursive excha nges involve the speaker directing the activities of members of the classroom through their u se of discourse.
SUPPLEMENTAL CONTENT
SC 1 These discursive exchan ges involve the provision of commentary that p rovides additional explanation of scientific concepts being discussed in the classroom
CONNECTING THEMES
CT 6 These discursive exchanges involve classroom discourse (by the teacher) where the big ide as and concepts of the unit are connected with other topics of discussion.
READING RD 11 These discursive exchanges involve discursive excha nges in which the speaker states what he or she is reading f rom written text.
STORY ST 2 These discursive excha nges involve sequences of discourse involve the student or teacher’s telling stories that are connected to the topic of discussion.
MISCELLANEOUS MISC 1 These discursive exchanges involve sequences of discourse that are not thematically connected to other types o f discursive sequences.
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
24
Table 5. Response Sequences SEQUECE UNIT TYPE CODE N DESCRIPTION
CLOSED CLO 46 These speech acts involve students and teacher providing one word answers to questions.
DESCRIPTIONS W/ EMBEDDED
DEFINITIONS
DWD
29
These speech acts involve students and teachers providing descriptions that include students defining the words they use in their descriptions.
MULTIPLE CONTEXT ANSWERS
MCA 2
These speech acts involve students providing answers to questions. These answers include the student explaining in multiple contexts.
ANSWERS WITH EXAMPLE
AWE 6
These speech acts involve students providing answers that include examples used for clarification.
WRITTEN RESPONSES
WR 3 These speech acts involve student-providing answers by reading their previously written answers.
ANSWERS WITH FURTHER
EXPLANATION
AWE 38 These speech acts involve answers that include the provision of additional explanation of the answer provided.
REPORTS OF OBSERVATIONS
ROO 20 These speech acts involve students reporting observations.
EXPLANING TEXT MEANING
ETM 2 These speech acts involve the students explaining the meaning of read text using ‘everyday English’
MISCELLANEOUS MISC 4 These discursive exchanges involve sequences of discourse that are not thematically connected to other types of discursive sequences.
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
25
You can tell, if its nonliving, cause like you said it vegetates. It just sits there . Something will vegetate, it will just sit there, and that’s how you can tell if it’s non -living, it can interact with things (Day 1 – 00:07:15).
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
26
TABLE 9. Dashawn & Descriptions with embedded definitions
Message units
LINE #
SPEAKER
ACTION UNIT
DASHAWN 1 The polar bears are 2 animals
Defines polar bears
3 and the plants 4 , they’re plants
Describes alternative, but does not provide alternative definition
5 so, 6 the fossil fuels 7 are organisms, 8 that are, 9 burned for energy,
Uses emergent pattern, the word followed by definition while being used to answer the question
10 so, 11 they would be like, 12 different things 13 so, 14 you really couldn’t study them, 15 because, 16 , if you were studying, 17 energy, Refers to fossil fuels as ‘energy’ 18 and if you are studying animals 19 that’s just, 20 two different things
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
27
TABLE 10. STUDENTS DISCUSSING CLASSIFICATION
MESSAGE UNITS
SPEAKER #1 SPEAKER #2
ACTION UNIT
LIN
E #
Olivia Shamere 1 There were 2 two mammals, 3 three insects 4 and three amphibians.
Olivia review the types of animals they selected for their assignment.
5 Because other animals 6 are not invertebrates, 7 other animals don’t have backbones 8 like we have backbones
Students use emergent pattern, they identify the term, define it,
and use for an explanation. 9 and other animals 10 Can live 11 on land too 12 so 13 they’re amphibians.
Students use emergent pattern, they identify the term, define it, and use it for an explanation.
Stanford University Graduate School of Education -Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
28
CHALLENGES OF APPROPRIATING SCIENCE DISCOURSE
Lecture Time: 00:26:39 00:29:54 3.2.00
Message Units Action Units OngoingSequence
Emanuel Teacher1 Alright marks change in
sequence2 Gene replication occurs3 during the formation of sex cells4 all it is, marks ease of
conceptualunderstanding
5 is when the6 parent cell7 just makes a daugther cell8 and9 separates the DNA10 a gamete11 is a sex cell12 and in a hybrid13 the dominant gene14 always shows15 that's all16 for my part17 Let’s do that again,18 let's19 go slower20 go back to the beginning21 go over it22 again23 you doin good
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
29
24 gene separation occurs duringthe formation of sex cells.
25 All that is marks translationsub-sequence
26 is when a parent cell27 get ready to make her daughter
cells,28 she just separate her DNA.
initiatespersonification
29 The gamits30 or gamete31 is a sex cell32 the dominant gene always show33 all that is marks
translation sub-sequence
34 is35 when a hybrid36 it have a dominant gene37 and a recessive gene38 and a dominant gene39 always be the one40 that's gone be show'in
CODESHIFTS
Stanford University Graduate School of Education -Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
30
He Talks to Much: Excessive use of Discourse?Line # Message unit Action Unit
Emanuel Teacher1 How can you get a cold2 from Trevor ?3 By4 touching him5 or6 By7 breathin it
8 In the body
9 A10 virus11 will go12 in your body to13 then it14 will like15 mutate itself referring to replication16 And17 make other18 more like19 virus cell
O’TANYA20 he didn’t say [make]21 a speech
interrupts to ridicule hisexplanation
22 Is he23 right ?24 O’Tanya
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
31
25 what26 did he27 just said ?28 He said29 Too much
student laughter &interrupts to ridicule hisexplanation
30 you31 didn’t understand it32 one more time33 Emanuel
EMANUEL34 Aiight,35 the virus will go36 in your system37 and like38 contaminate39 other bacteria40 and make41 more42 umm43 cells44 that’s it45 is he right
Stanford University Graduate School of Education -Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
32
24 gene separation occurs duringthe formation of sex cells.
25 All that is marks translationsub-sequence
26 is when a parent cell27 get ready to make her daughter
cells,28 she just separate her DNA.
initiatespersonification
29 The gamits30 or gamete31 is a sex cell32 the dominant gene always show33 all that is marks
translation sub-sequence
34 is35 when a hybrid36 it have a dominant gene37 and a recessive gene38 and a dominant gene39 always be the one40 that's gone be show'in
CODESHIFTS
Stanford University Graduate School of Education -Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
33
Experimental Group Control Group
11.99
Comparison of Pre-Post Test Scores
10.78
25.99
18.10
14.00
7.32
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.
34
% Gain
Percent Gain
29.15
15.26
Stanford University Graduate School of Education -Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
35
Experimental Group Control Group
36
Experimental Group Control Group
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Percent Gain by Question Type
37
ANALYSIS 1: PRE-POST TEST MEAN SCORE COMPARISON
Achievement (Max)
Group n Pre-test Score (SD )
Post-test Score (SD)
Raw Gain
% Gain
t Effect Size
Overall Score (48)
Experimental Control
25 24
11.99 (4.91) 10.78 (5.71)
25.99 (8.74) 18.10 (7.53)
14.00 7.32
+29.15 +15.26
10.97** 4.91**
1.97 1.10
Disaggregate Score (25)
Experimental Control
25 24
6.68 (2.92) 6.39 (3.89)
14.22 (4.61) 9.71 (4.10)
7.54 3.32
+30.16 +13.29
11.36** 4.32**
1.95 0.83
Aggregate Score (23)
Experimental Control
25 24
5.31 (2.95) 4.40 (2.55)
11.77 (5.07) 8.40 (4.13)
6.46 4.00
+28.06 +17.39
7.65** 4.41**
1.56 0.99
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
38
ANALYSIS 2: MEAN SCORE
Table 8. Comparisons of Achievement Tests Between Experimental and Control Groups
Achievement Max Group n Mean SD t p Effect Size Overall Score 48 Experimental
Control 25 24
25.99 18.10
8.74 7.53
3.38** 0.001 0.97
Disaggregate Score 25 Experimental Control
25 24
14.22 9.71
4.61 4.10
3.62** 0.001 1.03
Aggregate Score 23 Experimental Control
25 24
11.77 8.40
5.07 4.13
2.55* 0.014 0.94
p < 0.05 / p < 0.01
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
39
Analysis 2: Written vs. Essay Questions
Max Group n Mean SD p t Effect Siz e Multiple-Choice Overall Score 18 Treatment
Control 25 24
12.48 10.38
3.47 3.72
0.046 2.05* 0.59
Disaggregate Score 10 Treatment Control
25 24
7.40 5.71
2.10 2.33
0.010 2.67* 0.76
Aggregate Score 8 Treatment Control
25 24
5.08 4.67
1.87 1.79
0.433 0.79 0.22
Essay Overall Score 30 Treatment
Control 25 24
13.51 7.73
6.17 4.47
0.001 3.69** 1.05
Disaggregate Score 15 Treatment Control
25 24
6.82 4.00
3.44 2.45
0.002 3.30** 0.94
Aggregate Score 15 Treatment Control
25 24
6.69 3.73
3.59 2.94
0.003 3.15** 0.90
p < 0.05 / p < 0.01
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
40
Recognize that to be understood and correctly used, such terms required careful operational definition, rooted in shared experience and in simpler words previously defined; to comprehend, in other words that a scientific concept involves an idea first and a name afterward, and that understanding does not reside in the technical terms themselves (Aron, 1983, p. 92).
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
IntroductionLinguistic resources made available to a group of people shape their cultural and intellectual behaviors (Lakoff, 1993; Whorf, 1956). Appropriation of different languages can be seen as an appropriation of an alternative worldview (Agar, 1994; Gethin 1999). As individuals are constrained to a singular discursive practice, they are necessarily locked into the worldview made available by their mode of normative discourse.
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Wellington &Osborne (2001): Taxonomy of the words of science
Level 1: Naming Words: (a) Familiar objects, new names (synonyms)(b) New objects, new names(c) Names of chemical elements(d) Other nomenclature
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Wellington &Osborne (2001): Taxonomy of the words of science
Level 2: Process Words (a) Capable of ostensive definition, i.e. being shown.(b) Not capable of ostensive definition
Level 3: Concept Words(a) Derived from experience (sensory concepts)(b) With dual meanings, i.e. everyday and scientific: for example ‘force’ & ‘force’(c) Theoretical constructs (total abstractions, idealizations, and postulated entities)
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Theoretical Framework: Conceptual Continuity
We are arguing that the Linguistic relativity can help us improve our understanding of students learning.Conceptual Continuity = The idea that science concepts exist at varying levels of continuity to the same ideas as expressed in science.If words are not the concepts, then understanding may exist beyond their linguistic representations.
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
METHOD:
2- Year Ethnographic StudyFollowing a High School Baseball team for 2 SeasonsCollected a Variety of Data to Triangulate data
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Pre & Post Interviews (15 players)
Pre & Post Multiple Choice Tests
2- Year Ethnographic Study
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
I do know this. I know that once I create spin, I put more pressure … there is more pressure there is a higher pressure gradient on one side of the ball than on the other. Which if the spin is in that direction or in a north south direction, a 12 to 6 direction then I should get more pressure on top of the ball that causing the ball to dive. now if my finger goes a little bit on the side of the ball I create a side spin as well as a down spin, I should be able to create that pressure gradient it would be greater on this side of the ball which would create what would appear to be a two point break.
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Everyday Discourse:
“So like if you snap your wrist hard, then the top spin is going to be fast and that will make
it drop”
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Science Discourse:
“You control the air pressure you put on the ball, by the spin you put on the ball.”
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Baseball Discourse:
“So [when you throw a curve] you want the ball to come over and down so it puts
movement on the ball, then the seams catch the air so it breaks down.”
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Hybrid Discourse:
“When the ball's spinning, the air resistance or the drag will be less because of the
spinning ball parting air.”
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Table . Pre-analysis Baseball discourse- level 2 1 2 3 4 5
Cells Frequency
Pre
Frequency
Post Code Name Code Description Example
A
11
0? Differentiating Air Contact
These are instances of discourse where players use baseball terms to describe air contact and its effect on a baseball.
So you want the ball to come over and down so it's put movement on the ball and the seams catch the air, so it breaks down. (Joshua)
B
2
4
Differentiating Speed
These are instances of discourse where players use baseball terms to describe the concept of speed.
the ball should have a good, you know, velocity to it. (Julian)
C
1
2
Differentiating types of pitches
These are instances where the players describe the types of pitches that experience different types of movements.
Well, I began and I hold the ball over the two seams right here and I throw a knuckle curve so my middle finger goes over the seams, while my index finger lays kind of in the middle of the ball. (Jake)
D
57
22
Differentiating Velocity
These are instances of discourse where players use baseball terms to describe differences in the velocity of the ball's movement.
If the wind catches the seams at a right point, then the ball breaks a certain way. (Scott)
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
22
A
11
0? Differentiating Air Contact
These are instances of discourse where players use baseball terms to describe air contact and its effect on a baseball.
So you want the ball to come over and down so it's put movement on the ball and the seams catch the air, so it breaks down. (Joshua)
B
2
4
Differentiating Speed
These are instances of discourse where players use baseball terms to describe the concept of speed.
the ball should have a good, you know, velocity to it. (Julian)
C
1
2
Differentiating types of pitches
These are instances where the players describe the types of pitches that experience different types of movements.
Well, I began and I hold the ball over the two seams right here and I throw a knuckle curve so my middle finger goes over the seams, while my index finger lays kind of in the middle of the ball. (Jake)
D
57
22
Differentiating Velocity
These are instances of discourse where players use baseball terms to describe differences in the velocity of the ball's movement.
If the wind catches the seams at a right point, then the ball breaks a certain way. (Scott)
Table E. Hybrid discourse- level 2
1 2 3 4 5
CELLS Frequency
Pre
Frequency
Post
Code Name Code Description Example
A
2
2
Everyday to Baseball
These are instances of talk where the speaker uses everyday discourse first, then follows them with a Baseball alternative.
If you have less wind pressure, which means like if you throw less velocity then you won't have a curveball. You'll have a curveball but it won't curve as much.
B
2
0
Everyday to Science
These are instances of talk where the speaker uses everyday discourse first, then follows them with a scientific alternative.
A curveball moves because of how the wind or the air current hits the seams.
C
1
0
Science to Baseball
These are instances of talk where the speaker uses everyday discourse first, then follows them with a scientific alternative.
If you have less wind pressure, which means like if you throw it with less velocity then you won't have a curveball.
Hybrid Discourse
Another mode of discourse that has been a small component of students’ discourse involves instances when players blended multiple genres of discourse (Table E). We coded these instances using the Hybrid Discourse code. We coded discourse as hybrid only in instances where the players used one mode of discourse immediately following a different genre of discourse. Many times, the students’ switched genres to provide qualifiers that further explained the same concept by employing an alternative genre. Cell 4-A provides a description of Hybrid talk we coded as Everyday to Baseball talk. These were instances of talk
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
Continuity Types
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Conceptual Continuities
“It has different airs under it and over it and [the air] starts pressing down so [the
baseball] drops and the air on the bottom is more loose in the right way and it just the
heavy pressure makes it drop.”
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
When you flick the ball it cuts through the air It has different airs under it and over it and [the air] starts pressing it down so [the baseball] drops and the air on the bottom is more loose in the right way and it just the heavy pressure makes it drop.”
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Conceptual Continuities
Because when [a curveball] is thrown and when it is released out of the thrower’s hand, half of the ball would have more air going on it and there would be the resistance on like half of …I mean, one side of the ball would be different than the other going through air. And so, of course, the ball would drop.
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
I don’t know if it’s high or low, but one of them is on the top and one of them is on the bottom the one is pushing it down in kind of an arc. The one on the bottom can’t hold up to it. I guess probably the top one is high pressure and the bottom one is low and it’s pushing it down so it looks like it’s curving, so it is curving.
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Conceptual Continuity
Drag can affect a changeup. When you throw the changeup, the baseball is slower, and usually most changeups that are will slow down and kinda fall a little bit, just
drop a little bit for hitters to hit it down to the ground.
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method Data Conclusion
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
Conceptual Continuities
Informal Discourse has features similar to science discourse:
(a) Conceptual Components(b) Linguistic Components(c) Complex symbol systems
There is a need for increased studies that examine conceptual continuities as teaching resources
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method ConclusionData
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method ConclusionData
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.com
brbrown@stanford.edu site: www.stanford.edu/~brbrown
Bryan A. Brown, Ph.D.Stanford University Graduate School of Education -
Introduction Theoretical Frame Method ConclusionData
mailto:info@EtuSchule.commailto:info@EtuSchule.comRecommended