This week’s sensemaking articles provide insight into what different learning theories might look like in classrooms and how learning, according to the theories, can be maximized. Chen & Techawitthayachinda investigated storyline talk which happens in three stages – raising of uncertainty, maintaining the uncertainty while students work through it, and reducing the uncertainty through making connections. Lowell, Cherbow, and McNeill also look at storylines in units, and focus particularly on the facilitation of stages of the discussion that occur during these units and how that discussion needs to shift as the stages change.
Both of these articles focus on the implementation of sociocultural theory in science classrooms and they look for ways that the interactions between students, teacher, and sometimes student facilitator can be utilized to help students learn. The focus and implications of the research are more focused on how a teacher can best structure learning opportunities. Most of these opportunities occur in the group context, and there is little discussion of what is actually happening within students’ minds. One takeaway is that teachers may need more professional development to successfully implement these group learning techniques.
Odden takes a more individual, cognitive approach to exploring how individual students make sense of voltage, electric potential, and electric potential energy. Odden’s research involves talking with two students about their understanding of these concepts and pushing for explanation of deeper meaning. Odden then presents another concept – gravity/hill space – in the interview and observes how the students blend their understanding of voltage/charge with gravity/hill to create a new, linked understanding of the concepts that helps them better understand the original ideas.
I am struck by the different applications of the two theories – particularly the focus on either the individual’s internal meaning making or the group dynamics/leadership that is needed to progress through making connections in a large group.
Reading this post so long after reading the articles was really helpful to me! I agree with Bailey that it is a really nice and concise summary.
“I am struck by the different applications of the two theories – particularly the focus on either the individual’s internal meaning making or the group dynamics/leadership that is needed to progress through making connections in a large group.”
I totally agree with this and really appreciate finally seeing some of these theories in practice. It really helps give context for me and I’m sure will help clarify during class discussion
Beth,
I appreciate your straightforward summary of the articles. That makes it so much easier to compare. I definitely agree that the first papers left out what was happening in the minds of individual students—I’d like to know what, if anything, the authors thoughts about this.. I am typing this reply on my phone, so please excuse any errors 🙂