Online Science Class Group Sensemaking: Discourse Pattern and Student Roles
Main Article Content
Abstract
Sensemaking as a learning approach in science, allows students to develop evidence-based explanations of scientific phenomena. This article presents how students sensemake in groups in an online science classroom by looking at their discourses to find sensemaking patterns and their roles in the process. Data comes from 13 grade 10 students in an intact online science class. Data gathering involved the conduct of three 1-hour per-day synchronous classes. Each meeting used Zoom with breakout sessions where students worked as a group to explain a scientific phenomenon while drawing illustrations using Google Jamboard. Thematic analysis of the transcribed breakout room discussions shows evidence of students being able to discuss scientific phenomena together in the order of (1) initiating collaboration, (2) activating prior knowledge, (3) formulating hypotheses, (4) supporting claims, (5) assessing claims, and (6) reconciling claims. We observed that students can be initiators or followers during group sensemaking. Groups with more initiators during the discussion reached a higher level of sensemaking. These initiators also significantly increased post-test scores from pre-test scores on epistemic knowledge compared to those less engaged in the discussion. This indicated that group online sensemaking requires initiators and engagement in the process.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
References
Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically. Review of Educational Research, 85(2), 275–314. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551063
Berland, L. K., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 68–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20446
Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20286
Bråten, I., Britt, M. A., Strømsø, H. I., & Rouet, J.-F. (2011). The Role of Epistemic Beliefs in the Comprehension of Multiple Expository Texts: Toward an Integrated Model. Educational Psychologist, 46(1), 48–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.538647
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Bulić, M., & Blažević, I. (2022). Challenges of Nature and Biology Online Learning for Students with Disabilities: A Mixed Methodology Approach. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 21(4), 255–275. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.4.15
Cannady, M. A., Vincent-Ruz, P., Chung, J. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2019). Scientific sensemaking supports science content learning across disciplines and instructional contexts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 59, 101802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101802
Duschl, R. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Planning and carrying out investigations: an entry to learning and to teacher professional development around NGSS science and engineering practices. International Journal of STEM Education, 1(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-014-0012-6
Facione, P. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction (The Delphi Report).
Greene, J. A., & Yu, S. B. (2016). Educating Critical Thinkers. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215622223
Hedman, M., & Passmore, C. (2013). Understanding modeling, the NGSS practices, and the moon. Center for Mathematics and Science Education.
Hogan, M. (2019). Sense-making is the core of NGSS. Illuminate Education.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in Science Education: An Overview (pp. 3–27). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_1
Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003). The Development of Argument Skills. Child Development, 74(5), 1245–1260. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00605
Maloney, D. (2015). Teaching Critical Thinking: Sense-Making, Explanations, Language, and Habits. The Physics Teacher, 53(7), 409–411. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4931008
Meza, J. A. D., Castro, M. L. C., & Vivas, R. V. J. (2022). The diagram as a mediator in collaborative learning: A conceptual review. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 35, 100634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2022.100634
Michael Nussbaum, E. (2008). Collaborative discourse, argumentation, and learning: Preface and literature review. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(3), 345–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.06.001
Muis, K. R., & Duffy, M. C. (2013). Epistemic climate and epistemic change: Instruction designed to change students’ beliefs and learning strategies and improve achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 213–225. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029690
Munneke, L., van Amelsvoort, M., & Andriessen, J. (2003). The role of diagrams in collaborative argumentation-based learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(1–2), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00076-4
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press.
Odden, T. O. B., & Russ, R. S. (2019). Defining sensemaking: Bringing clarity to a fragmented theoretical construct. Science Education, 103(1), 187–205. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21452
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en
Park, B. Y., Rodriguez, L., & Campbell, T. (2019). COMMENTARY: Using Models to Teach Science. The Science Teacher.
Schwarz, C. V., Passmore, C., & Reiser, B. J. (2017). Helping students make sense of the world using next generation science and engineering practices. National Science Teachers Association Press. .
Strømsø, H. I., & Bråten, I. (2010). The role of personal epistemology in the self-regulation of internet-based learning. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 91–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-009-9043-7
Su, Y., Liu, K., Lai, C., & Jin, T. (2021). The progression of collaborative argumentation among English learners: A qualitative study. System, 98, 102471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102471
Vilhunen, E., Chiu, M.-H., Salmela-Aro, K., Lavonen, J., & Juuti, K. (2023). Epistemic Emotions and Observations Are Intertwined in Scientific Sensemaking: A Study among Upper Secondary Physics Students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 21(5), 1545–1566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-022-10310-5
Weinberg, A., Wiesner, E., & Fukawa-Connelly, T. (2014). Students’ sense-making frames in mathematics lectures. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 33, 168–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.11.005
Yang, F.-Y., Liu, S.-Y., Hsu, C.-Y., Chiou, G.-L., Wu, H.-K., Wu, Y.-T., Chen, S., Liang, J.-C., Tsai, M.-J., Lee, S. W.-Y., Lee, M.-H., Lin, C.-L., Chu, R. J., & Tsai, C.-C. (2018). High-School Students’ Epistemic Knowledge of Science and Its Relation to Learner Factors in Science Learning. Research in Science Education, 48(2), 325–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9570-6
Zhao, F., & Schuchardt, A. (2021). Development of the Sci-math Sensemaking Framework: categorizing sensemaking of mathematical equations in science. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00264-x
