How Learners Perceive Inter-Disciplinary Dialogic Science Related Learning Experiences: A Mixed-Method Study

Aviv Sharon; Lihi Telem; Einat Heyd-Metzuyanim

doi:10.14712/18047106.3183

Vol. 15 No. 1 (2024): Scientia in educatione Research Reports

How Learners Perceive Inter-Disciplinary Dialogic Science Related Learning Experiences: A Mixed-Method Study

Aviv Sharon, Lihi Telem, Einat Heyd-Metzuyanim, ¹

Technion - Israel Institute of Technology

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14712/18047106.3183

PDF

How to Cite

Aviv Sharon, Lihi Telem, & Heyd-Metzuyanim, E. (2024). How Learners Perceive Inter-Disciplinary Dialogic Science Related Learning Experiences: A Mixed-Method Study. Scientia in Educatione, 15(1), 59-79. https://doi.org/10.14712/18047106.3183

Download Citation

Abstract

Well-designed, dialogic, and interdisciplinary learning opportunities in science related disciplines can promote many educational goals. The difficulty lies in providing these opportunities in schools. Can out-of-school focus days fill the void? Here, we performed a mixed methods study to discover how middle school learners perceive focus days that included dialogic, interdisciplinary activities in mathematics, science, and philosophy, all around socio-scientific dilemmas. We also sought to understand the experiences’ impact on learners’ self-perceived dialogic engagement in the school classroom. We focused on (1) learners’ perceptions and recollections of the dialogic climate during the focus days; (2) the perceived contribution of the three disciplines (mathematics, science and philosophy) to the interdisciplinary focus days; and (3) the focus days’ effects on the dialogic climate in the everyday school environment. Our findings suggest that (1) learners generally considered the focus days as enjoyable and different than their everyday school experience; (2) students did not consider each discipline equally relevant to the focus days’ main topics; and (3) the effects of the focus days were localized, that is, no impact was found on the dialogic climate at school. We discuss implications for promoting interdisciplinary, dialogic science related learning in secondary schools.

Keywords dialogic instruction classroom dialogue interdisciplinary approach educational environment student attitudes

References

Archer, L., DeWitt, J., & Willis, B. (2014). Adolescent boys’ science aspirations: Masculinity, capital, and power. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21122 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Blanca, M. J., Alarcón, R., Arnau, J., Bono, R., & Bendayan, R. (2017). Non-normal data: Is ANOVA still a valid option? Psicothema, 29(4), 552–557. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2016.383 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Chen, G., Zhang, J., Chan, C. K. K., Michaels, S., Resnick, L. B., & Huang, X. (2020). The link between student-perceived teacher talk and student enjoyment, anxiety and discursive engagement in the classroom. British Educational Research Journal, 46(3), 631–652. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3600 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Chettiparamb, A. (2007). Interdisciplinarity: A literature review. The Interdisciplinary Teaching and Learning Group, Subject Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies, School of Humanities, University of Southampton. Search in Google Scholar
Clarke, S. N. (2015). The right to speak. In Socializing intelligence zhrough academic talk and dialogue (pp. 167–180). American Educational Research Association. Search in Google Scholar
Clarke, S. N., Resnick, L. B., & Penstein Rosé, C. (2016). Dialogic instruction: A new frontier. In L. Corno, & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (3rd ed., pp. 378–389). Routledge. Search in Google Scholar
Eronen, L., Kokko, S., & Sormunen, K. (2019). Escaping the subject-based class: A Finnish case study of developing transversal competencies in a transdisciplinary course. The Curriculum Journal, 30(3), 264–278. Search in Google Scholar
Gero, A., Essami, H., Danino, O., & Kornblum, L. (2022). Students’ attitudes toward interdisciplinary learning: A high-school course on solar cells. International Journal of Engineering Education, 38(4), 1130–1140. Search in Google Scholar
Gero, A., & Zach, E. (2014). High school programme in electro-optics: A case study on interdisciplinary learning and systems thinking. International Journal of Engineering Education, 30(5), 1190–1199. Search in Google Scholar
Goetz, T., Bieg, M., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Hall, N. C. (2013). Do girls really experience more anxiety in mathematics? Psychological Science, 24(10), 2079–2087. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613486989 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Hardman, F. (2019). Embedding a dialogic pedagogy in the classroom: What is the research telling us? In The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education (pp. 139–151). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429441677-13 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Jiang, S., Shen, J., & Smith, B. E. (2019). Designing discipline-specific roles for interdisciplinary learning: two comparative cases in an afterschool STEM+L programme. International Journal of Science Education, 41(6), 803–826. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1581958 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Kiemer, K., Gröschner, A., Pehmer, A. K., & Seidel, T. (2015). Effects of a classroom discourse intervention on teachers’ practice and students’ motivation to learn mathematics and science. Learning and Instruction, 35, 94–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.10.003 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Kohen, Z., & Orenstein, D. (2021). Mathematical modeling of tech-related real-world problems for secondary school-level mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107, 71–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10020-1 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Koichu, B., Schwarz, B. B., Heyd-Metzuyanim, E., Tabach, M., & Yarden, A. (2022). Design practices and principles for promoting dialogic argumentation via interdisciplinarity. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 37(July 2021), 100657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2022.100657 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0151-2 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach. Routledge. Search in Google Scholar
Nakagawa, S., Poulin, R., Mengersen, K., Reinhold, K., Engqvist, L., Lagisz, M., & Senior, A. M. (2014). Meta-analysis of variation: Ecological and evolutionary applications and beyond. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 6(2), 143–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12309 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Nikitina, S. (2005). Pathways of interdisciplinary cognition. Cognition and Instruction, 23(3), 389–425. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2303 3 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Nowacek, R. S. (2005). A discourse-based theory of interdisciplinary connections. The Journal of General Education, 54(3), 171–195. https://doi.org/10.1353/jge.2006.0006 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., Marsh, H.W., Murayama, K., & Goetz, T. (2017). Achievement emotions and academic performance: Longitudinal models of reciprocal effects. Child Development, 88(5), 1653–1670. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12704 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014). Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: a systematic review of 12 years of educational research. Studies in Science Education, 50(1), 85–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2014.881626 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Rop, C. J. (2003). Spontaneous inquiry questions in high school chemistry classrooms: Perceptions of a group of motivated learners. International Journal of Science Education, 25(1), 13–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210126496 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Schwarz, B. B., & Baker, M. J. (2016). Dialogue, argumentation and education: History, theory, and practice. Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar
Sharon, A. J., Ben-Dor, N., & Heyd-Metzuyanim, E. (in process). Conceptualizing and measuring dialogic climate: The Dialogic Climate Inventory (DCI) [Manuscript in preparation]. Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion – Israel Institute of Technology. Search in Google Scholar
Skidmore, D. (2019). Dialogism and education. In N. Mercer, R. Wegerif, & L. Major (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education (pp. 27–37). Routledge. Search in Google Scholar
Song, G., & Wang, Z. (2021). Factors influencing middle school students’ interdisciplinary competence in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58, 1041–1072. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21692 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Spalding, E. (2002). Of organelles and octagons: What do preservice secondary teachers learn from interdisciplinary teaching? Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(6), 699–714. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00029-X Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Spelt, E. J. H., Biemans, H. J. A., Tobi, H., Luning, P. A., & Mulder, M. (2009). Teaching and learning in interdisciplinary higher education: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 21(4), 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9113-z Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Tsemach, E., Schwarz, B. B., Israeli, M., & Keynan, O. (2023). Advancing group epistemic practices in the resolution of interdisciplinary societal dilemmas. Dialogic Pedagogy, 11(3), A119–A147. https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2023.551 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Warwick, P., & Cook, V. (2019). Classroom dialogue. In N. Mercer, R. Wegerif, & L. Major (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education (pp. 121–124). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429441677-11 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Wegerif, R. (2006). Dialogic education: What is it and why do we need it? Education Review, 19(2), 58–66. Wegerif, R. (2019). Towards a dialogic theory of education for the internet age. In N. Mercer, R. Wegerif, & L. Major (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education (pp. 14–26). Routledge. Search in Google Scholar
Zafrani, E., & Yarden, A. (2022). Dialog-constraining institutional logics and their interactional manifestation in the science classroom. Science Education, 106(1), 142–171. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21687 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

[1] Archer, L., DeWitt, J., & Willis, B. (2014). Adolescent boys’ science aspirations: Masculinity, capital, and power. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21122 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[2] Blanca, M. J., Alarcón, R., Arnau, J., Bono, R., & Bendayan, R. (2017). Non-normal data: Is ANOVA still a valid option? Psicothema, 29(4), 552–557. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2016.383 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[3] Chen, G., Zhang, J., Chan, C. K. K., Michaels, S., Resnick, L. B., & Huang, X. (2020). The link between student-perceived teacher talk and student enjoyment, anxiety and discursive engagement in the classroom. British Educational Research Journal, 46(3), 631–652. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3600 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[4] Chettiparamb, A. (2007). Interdisciplinarity: A literature review. The Interdisciplinary Teaching and Learning Group, Subject Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies, School of Humanities, University of Southampton. Search in Google Scholar

[5] Clarke, S. N. (2015). The right to speak. In Socializing intelligence zhrough academic talk and dialogue (pp. 167–180). American Educational Research Association. Search in Google Scholar

[6] Clarke, S. N., Resnick, L. B., & Penstein Rosé, C. (2016). Dialogic instruction: A new frontier. In L. Corno, & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (3rd ed., pp. 378–389). Routledge. Search in Google Scholar

[7] Eronen, L., Kokko, S., & Sormunen, K. (2019). Escaping the subject-based class: A Finnish case study of developing transversal competencies in a transdisciplinary course. The Curriculum Journal, 30(3), 264–278. Search in Google Scholar

[8] Gero, A., Essami, H., Danino, O., & Kornblum, L. (2022). Students’ attitudes toward interdisciplinary learning: A high-school course on solar cells. International Journal of Engineering Education, 38(4), 1130–1140. Search in Google Scholar

[9] Gero, A., & Zach, E. (2014). High school programme in electro-optics: A case study on interdisciplinary learning and systems thinking. International Journal of Engineering Education, 30(5), 1190–1199. Search in Google Scholar

[10] Goetz, T., Bieg, M., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Hall, N. C. (2013). Do girls really experience more anxiety in mathematics? Psychological Science, 24(10), 2079–2087. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613486989 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[11] Hardman, F. (2019). Embedding a dialogic pedagogy in the classroom: What is the research telling us? In The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education (pp. 139–151). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429441677-13 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[12] Jiang, S., Shen, J., & Smith, B. E. (2019). Designing discipline-specific roles for interdisciplinary learning: two comparative cases in an afterschool STEM+L programme. International Journal of Science Education, 41(6), 803–826. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1581958 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[13] Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[14] Kiemer, K., Gröschner, A., Pehmer, A. K., & Seidel, T. (2015). Effects of a classroom discourse intervention on teachers’ practice and students’ motivation to learn mathematics and science. Learning and Instruction, 35, 94–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.10.003 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[15] Kohen, Z., & Orenstein, D. (2021). Mathematical modeling of tech-related real-world problems for secondary school-level mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107, 71–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10020-1 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[16] Koichu, B., Schwarz, B. B., Heyd-Metzuyanim, E., Tabach, M., & Yarden, A. (2022). Design practices and principles for promoting dialogic argumentation via interdisciplinarity. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 37(July 2021), 100657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2022.100657 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[17] Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0151-2 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[18] Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach. Routledge. Search in Google Scholar

[19] Nakagawa, S., Poulin, R., Mengersen, K., Reinhold, K., Engqvist, L., Lagisz, M., & Senior, A. M. (2014). Meta-analysis of variation: Ecological and evolutionary applications and beyond. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 6(2), 143–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12309 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[20] Nikitina, S. (2005). Pathways of interdisciplinary cognition. Cognition and Instruction, 23(3), 389–425. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2303 3 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[21] Nowacek, R. S. (2005). A discourse-based theory of interdisciplinary connections. The Journal of General Education, 54(3), 171–195. https://doi.org/10.1353/jge.2006.0006 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[22] Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., Marsh, H.W., Murayama, K., & Goetz, T. (2017). Achievement emotions and academic performance: Longitudinal models of reciprocal effects. Child Development, 88(5), 1653–1670. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12704 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[23] Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014). Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: a systematic review of 12 years of educational research. Studies in Science Education, 50(1), 85–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2014.881626 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[24] Rop, C. J. (2003). Spontaneous inquiry questions in high school chemistry classrooms: Perceptions of a group of motivated learners. International Journal of Science Education, 25(1), 13–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210126496 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[25] Schwarz, B. B., & Baker, M. J. (2016). Dialogue, argumentation and education: History, theory, and practice. Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

[26] Sharon, A. J., Ben-Dor, N., & Heyd-Metzuyanim, E. (in process). Conceptualizing and measuring dialogic climate: The Dialogic Climate Inventory (DCI) [Manuscript in preparation]. Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion – Israel Institute of Technology. Search in Google Scholar

[27] Skidmore, D. (2019). Dialogism and education. In N. Mercer, R. Wegerif, & L. Major (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education (pp. 27–37). Routledge. Search in Google Scholar

[28] Song, G., & Wang, Z. (2021). Factors influencing middle school students’ interdisciplinary competence in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58, 1041–1072. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21692 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[29] Spalding, E. (2002). Of organelles and octagons: What do preservice secondary teachers learn from interdisciplinary teaching? Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(6), 699–714. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00029-X Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[30] Spelt, E. J. H., Biemans, H. J. A., Tobi, H., Luning, P. A., & Mulder, M. (2009). Teaching and learning in interdisciplinary higher education: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 21(4), 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9113-z Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[31] Tsemach, E., Schwarz, B. B., Israeli, M., & Keynan, O. (2023). Advancing group epistemic practices in the resolution of interdisciplinary societal dilemmas. Dialogic Pedagogy, 11(3), A119–A147. https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2023.551 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[32] Warwick, P., & Cook, V. (2019). Classroom dialogue. In N. Mercer, R. Wegerif, & L. Major (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education (pp. 121–124). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429441677-11 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

[33] Wegerif, R. (2006). Dialogic education: What is it and why do we need it? Education Review, 19(2), 58–66. Wegerif, R. (2019). Towards a dialogic theory of education for the internet age. In N. Mercer, R. Wegerif, & L. Major (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education (pp. 14–26). Routledge. Search in Google Scholar

[34] Zafrani, E., & Yarden, A. (2022). Dialog-constraining institutional logics and their interactional manifestation in the science classroom. Science Education, 106(1), 142–171. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21687 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar

Scientia in educatione

Abstract

References

Downloads

License