Investigating discursive functions and potential cognitive demands of teacher questioning in the science classroom

References

• Anderson, L., Krathwohl, R., Airasian, P., Cruikshank, K., Mayer, R., Pintrich, P., … Wittrock, M. (Eds.). (2001). Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of bloom’s taxonomy. New York, NY: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2013). Australian curriculum: Science. Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/
   Google Scholar
• Barnhart, T., & van Es, E. (2015). Studying teacher noticing: Examining the relationship among pre-service science teachers’ ability to attend, analyze and respond to student thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 83–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berland, L. K., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 68–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogiages, C. A., & Lotter, C. (2011). Modeling natural selection. The Science Teacher, 78(2), 34–40.
   Google Scholar
• Bolen, J. (2009). An investigation of limited professional development on teacher questioning and learner responses ( Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (UMI No. 3359880).
   Google Scholar
• Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, M., & Rubin, D. (2006). How contingent questioning promotes extended student talk: A function of display questions. Journal of Literacy Research, 38(2), 141–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, G., & Wragg, E. C. (1993). Questioning. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, K., & Kennedy, H. (2011). Learning through conversation: Exploring and extending teacher and children’s involvement in classroom talk. Social Psychology International, 32(4), 377–396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, T., Oh, P. S., & Neilson, D. (2012). Discursive modes and their pedagogical functions in Model-Based Inquiry (MBI) classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 34(15), 2393–2419.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, T., Zhang, D., & Neilson, D. (2011). Model based inquiry in the high school physics classroom: An exploratory study of implementation and outcomes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 258–269.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavagnetto, A., & Hand, B. M. (2012). The importance of embedding argument within science classrooms. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Perspectives on scientific argumentation (pp. 39–53). Springer Science+Business Media B.V., Springer: Dordrecht.
   Google Scholar
• Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument interventions in K-12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336–371.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Chapin, S. H., O’Connor, C., & Anderson, N. C. (2003). Classroom discussions: Using math talk to help students learn. Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, Y.-C., Hand, B., & Norton-Meier, L. (2017). Teacher roles of questioning in early elementary science classrooms: A framework promoting student cognitive complexities in argumentation. Research in Science Education, 47(2), 373–405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, C. (2006). Classroom interaction in science: Teacher questioning and feedback to students’ responses. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 1315–1346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815–843.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, C., & Langsford, A. (2004). Questioning students in ways that encourage thinking. Teaching Science: the Journal of the Australian Science Teachers Association, 50(4), 16–21.
   Google Scholar
• Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Students’ questions: A potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christodoulou, A., & Osborne, J. (2014). The science classroom as a site of epistemic talk: A case study of a teacher’s attempts to teach science based on argument. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(10), 1275–1300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. D. (2007). Personally-seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 253–277.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cochran-Smith, M. (2005). The new teacher education: For better or for worse? Educational Researcher, 34(7), 3–17.
   Google Scholar
• Cochran-Smith, M. (2006). Policy, practice, and politics in teacher education: Editorials from the Journal of Teacher Education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 916–937.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon, J. T. (1982). The multidisciplinary study of questioning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(2), 147–165.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon, J. T. (1988). The remedial status of student questioning. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 20(3), 197–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London: Methuen.
   Google Scholar
• Erickson, F. (2011). On noticing teacher noticing. In M. Sherin, V. Jacobs, & R. Philipp (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes (pp. 17–34). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, C., Kennedy, A., Reid, L., & Mckinney, S. (2007). Teachers’ continuing professional development: Contested concepts, understandings and models. Professional Development in Education, 33, 153–169.
   Google Scholar
• Gall, M. (1984). Synthesis of research on teachers’ questioning. Educational Leadership, 42(3), 40–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gall, M. D. (1970). The use of questions in teaching. Review of Educational Research, 40(5), 707–721.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gall, M. D., & Rhody, T. (1987). Review of research on questioning techniques. In W. W. Wilen (Ed.), Questions, questioning techniques, and effective teaching (pp. 23–48). Washington, DC: National Education Association.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, S., Sharp, G., Cloutier, E., & Diamond, N. (1983). Effective classroom questioning. East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning, ERIC Education Resources Information Center. (ED 285 497).
   Google Scholar
• Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 381–391.
   Google Scholar
• Hand, B., & Keys, C. (1999). Inquiry investigation. The Science Teacher, 66(4), 27–29.
   Google Scholar
• Hardy, I., Kloetzer, B., Moeller, K., & Sodian, B. (2010). The analysis of classroom discourse: Elementary school science curricula advancing reasoning with evidence. Educational Assessment, 15(3–4), 197–221.
   Google Scholar
• Hoban, G. (2002). Teacher learning for educational change. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howe, C., & Abedin, M. (2013). Classroom dialogue: A systematic review across four decades of research. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(3), 325–356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchison, P., & Hammer, D. (2010). Attending to student epistemological framing in a science classroom. Science Education, 94(3), 506–524.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, V. R., Lamb, L. L., & Philipp, R. A. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169–202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawalkar, A., & Vijapurkar, J. (2013). Scaffolding science talk: The role of teachers’ questions in the inquiry classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2004–2027.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kayima, F., & Jakobsen, A. (2018). Exploring the situational adequacy of teacher questions in science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 1–31. doi:10.1007/s11165-018-9696-9
   Web of Science ®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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konya, A. B. (1972). The effect of higher and lower order teacher questions on the frequency and type of student verbalizations. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Tennessee.
   Google Scholar
• Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leach, J., & Scott, P. (1995). The demands of learning science concepts: Issues of theory and practice. School Science Review, 76(277), 47–52.
   Google Scholar
• Leach, J., & Scott, P. (2000, November). The concept of learning demand as a tool for designing teaching sequences. Paper prepared at the meeting research-based teaching sequences, Université Paris VII, France.
   Google Scholar
• Leach, J. T., & Scott, P. H. (2002). Designing and evaluating science teaching sequences: An approach drawing upon the concept of learning demand and a social constructivist perspective on learning. Studies in Science Education, 38, 115–142.
   Google Scholar
• Leach, J. T., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Individual and sociocultural views of learning in science education. Science & Education, 12, 91–113.
   Google Scholar
• Lefstein, A., Snell, J., & Israeli, M. (2015). From moves to sequences: Expanding the unit of analysis in the study of classroom discourse. British Educational Research Journal, 41, 866–885.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwoord, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Louca, L. T., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tzialli, D. (2012). Identification, interpretation-evaluation, response: An alternative framework for analyzing teacher discourse in science. International Journal of Science Education, 34(12), 1823–1856.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, A. M., & Hand, B. (2009). Factors affecting the implementation of argument in the elementary science classroom. A longitudinal case study. Research in Science Education, 39, 17–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMahon, K. (2012). Case studies of interactive whole-class teaching in primary science: Communicative approach and pedagogic purposes. International Journal of Science Education, 34(11), 1687–1708.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNeill, K. L., & Pimentel, D. S. (2009). Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation. Science Education, 94, 203–229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. (2004). Sociocultural discourse analysis: Analysing classroom talk as a social mode of thinking. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 137–168.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. (2010). The analysis of classroom talk: Methods and methodologies. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 1–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molinari, L., Mameli, C., & Gnisci, A. (2013). A sequential analysis of classroom discourse in Italian primary schools: The many faces of the IRF pattern. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 414–430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog/13165/a-framework-for-k-12-science-education-practices-crosscutting-concepts.
   Google Scholar
• NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18290/next-generation-science-standards-for-states-by-states.
   Google Scholar
• Nilsson, P., & Vikström, A. (2015). Making PCK explicit-capturing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 37(17), 2836–2857.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oh, P. S. (2010). How can teachers help students formulate scientific hypotheses? Some strategies found in abductive inquiry activities of earth science. International Journal of Science Education, 32(4), 541–560.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oh, P. S., & Campbell, T. (2013). Understanding of science classrooms in different countries through the analysis of discourse modes for building ‘classroom science knowledge’ (CSK). Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 33(3), 597–625.
   Google Scholar
• Oliveira, A. W. (2010). Improving teacher questioning in science inquiry discussions through professional development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 422–453.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pimentel, D. S., & McNeill, K. L. (2013). Conducting talk in secondary science classrooms: Investigating instructional moves and teachers’ beliefs. Science Education, 97(3), 367–394.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenshine, B. (1976). Classroom instruction. In N. L. Gage Ed., The psychology of teaching methods (pp. 335–371, 75th NSSE Yearbook). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roth, W.-M. (2001). Situating cognition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10, 27–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, W.-M. (2005). Talking science: Language and learning in science. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Roth, W.-M. (2006). Learning science: A singular plural perspective. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
   Google Scholar
• Sampson, V., Grooms, J., & Walker, J. P. (2011). Argument-driven inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: An exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2), 217–257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherr, R., & Hammer, D. (2009). Student behavior and epistemological framing: Examples from collaborative active-learning activities in physics. Cognition and Instruction, 27(2), 147–174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, P. H. (1998). Teacher talk and meaning making in science classrooms: A Vygotskian analysis and review. Studies in Science Education, 32, 45–80.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, P. H., Mortimer, E. F., & Aguiar, O. G. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90(4), 605–631.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smart, J. B., & Marshall, J. C. (2013). Interactions between classroom discourse, teacher questioning, and student cognitive engagement in middle school science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(2), 249–267.
   Google Scholar
• Storey, S. O. (2004). Teacher questioning to improve early childhood reasoning ( Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (UMI No. 3132260).
   Google Scholar
• Sutton, C. (1996). The scientific model as a form of speech. In G. Welford, J. Osborne, & P. Scott (Eds.), Research in science education in Europe (pp. 143–152). London: The Falmer Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Booven, D. (2015). Revisiting the authoritative–Dialogic tension in inquiry-based elementary science teacher questioning. International Journal of Science Education, 37(8), 1182–1201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997a). Reflective discourse: Developing shared understandings in a physics classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 209–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997b). Using questioning to guide student thinking. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 227–269.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008a). How novice science teachers appropriate epistemic discourses around model-based inquiry for use in science classrooms. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 310–378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008b). Beyond the scientific method: Model- based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Science Education, 92, 941–967.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yip, D. Y. (2004). Questioning skills for conceptual change in science instruction. Journal of Biological Education, 38(2), 76–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar