Students’ engagement in Physics lesson: proposal and discussion of an analysis tool
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22600/1518-8795.ienci2019v24n1p139Keywords:
Engagement, Analysis tool, Classroom interactions, Inquiry-based teachingAbstract
In this paper, we present an analysis tool proposal to investigate students' engagement in inquiry-based teaching. For this proposal, called as engagement indicators, we considered studies that focuses on the students’ involvement with classroom problems and their resolution, the idea of productive disciplinary engagement. For this purpose, we considered elements of working in group and the construction and execution of work plans, besides emotional aspects that intermix these processes. To evaluate if that tool is suitable for use in research, we analyzed a class that happened with a high school class. The results show that the tool allows to understand the development of this engagement and its relationship with the construction of understanding by the students. In this sense, we understand that the indicators of engagement can also be of great value for the analysis of the constitution of the classroom as a community of practices.References
Abd-el-Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., & Hofstein, A. (2004). Inquiry in Science Education: International Perspectives. Science Education, 88(3), 397-419. http://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10118
Barrelo Jr., N. (2010). Argumentação no discurso oral e escrito de alunos do ensino médio em uma sequência didática de física moderna. (Dissertação de mestrado). Instituto de Física, Instituto de Química e Faculdade de Educação, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP. http://doi.org/10.11606/D.48.2010.tde-22062010-140211
Bloome, D., Puro, P., & Theodorou, E. (1989). Procedural display and classroom lessons. Curriculum Inquiry, 19(3), 265–291. http://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.1989.11075331
Brockington, G. (2005). A Realidade escondida: dualidade onda-partícula para estudantes do ensino médio. (Dissertação de mestrado). Instituto de Física, Instituto de Química e Faculdade de Educação, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP.
Carvalho, A. M. P. (2011). Uma Metodologia para Estudar os Processos de Ensino e Aprendizagem em Sala de Aula. In F. M. T. Santos & I. M. Greca (Orgs.). A Pesquisa em Ensino de Ciências no Brasil e suas Metodologias. (2a ed.). Ijuí, RS: Unijuí.
Carvalho, A.M.P. (2013). O ensino de Ciências e a proposição de sequências de ensino investigativas. In Carvalho, A.M.P. (Org.). Ensino de Ciências por Investigação: condições para implementação em sala de aula. São Paulo, SP: Cengage Learning.
Duschl, R. (2008). Science Education in Three-Part Harmony: Balancing Conceptual, Epistemic, and Social Learning Goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268-291. http://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371
Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding Principle for Fostering Productive Disciplinary Engagement: explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 399-484. http://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI2004_1
Faria, A. F. (2008). Engajamento de Estudantes em Atividade de Investigação. (Dissertação de mestrado). Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, MG. Recuperado de http://www.bibliotecadigital.ufmg.br/dspace/handle/1843/FAEC-84XHTF
Fredricks, J. A., & McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.). Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763–782). Boston, United States of America: Springer US.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004), School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. http://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1989). Sharing cognition through collective comprehension activity. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.). Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 331-348). Washington, United States of America: American Psychological Association.
Herrenkohl, L. R., & Guerra, M. R. (1998). Participant structures, scientific discourse, and student engagement in fourth grade. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 431-473. http://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1604_3
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodríguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the Lesson” or “Doing Science”: Argument in High School Genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-792. http://doi.org/10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6%3c757::AID-SCE5%3e3.0.CO;2-F
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M.P., & Crujeiras, B. (2017). Epistemic Practices and Scientific Practices in Science Education. In K. S. Taber & B. Akpan (Orgs.). Science Education: An International Course Companion (pp. 69-80). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense Publisher.
Julio, J., Vaz, A., & Fagundes, A. (2011). Atenção: Alunos engajados - Análise de um grupo de aprendizagem em atividade de investigação. Ciência & Educação (Bauru), 17(1), 63–81. Recuperado de http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5274050
Kelly, G. J., & Licona, P. (2018). Epistemic Practices and Science Education. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.). History, Philosophy and Science Teaching: New Perspectives (pp. 139–165). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62616-1_5
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the question and solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 27(1), 29-63. http://doi.org/10.3102/00028312027001029
Mercer, N. (1995). The Guided Construction of Knowledge: Talk Among Teachers and Learners. Washington, United States of America: Library of Congress.
Munford, D., & Lima, M. E. C. C. (2007). Ensinar ciências por investigação: em que estamos de acordo? Ensaio Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências (Belo Horizonte), 9(1), 89-111. http://doi.org/10.1590/1983-211720070901070107
Sasseron, L. H. (2013). Interações discursivas e investigação em sala de aula: o papel do professor. In A. M. P. de Carvalho (Org.). Ensino de Ciências por Investigação: condições para implementação em sala de aula. São Paulo, SP: Cengage Learning.
Sasseron, L. H. (2015). Alfabetização científica, ensino por investigação e argumentação: relações entre ciências da natureza e escola. Ensaio Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências (Belo Horizonte), 17(n.esp.), 49-67. http://doi.org/10.1590/1983-2117201517s04
Sasseron, L. H., & Duschl, R. A. (2016). Ensino de ciências e as Práticas epistêmicas: o papel do professor e o engajamento dos estudantes. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 21(2), 52-67. Recuperado de https://www.if.ufrgs.br/cref/ojs/index.php/ienci/article/view/19
Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Duschl, R. A., Schulze, S., & John, J. (1995). Students’ understanding of the objectives and procedures of experimentation in the science classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(2), 131-166. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0402_1
Souza, T. N. (2015). Engajamento disciplinar produtivo e o ensino por investigação: estudo de caso em aulas de física no ensino médio. (Dissertação de mestrado). Instituto de Física, Instituto de Química e Faculdade de Educação, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP. Recuperado de http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/81/81131/tde-29092015-144721/pt-br.php
Stroupe, D. (2014). Examining Classroom Science Practice Communities: How Teachers as Students Negotiate Epistemic Agency and Learn Science-as-practice. Science Education, 98(3), 487-516. http://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21112
Sundberg, B., Areljung, S., Due, K., Ekström, K., Ottander, C., & Tellgren, B. (2018). Opportunities for and obstacles to science in preschools: views from a community perspective. International Journal of Science Education, 40(17), 2061-2077. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1518615
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston, United States of America: Harvard Business School Press.
Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2018). Ambitious science teaching, Boston, United States of America: Harvard Education Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
IENCI is an Open Access journal, which does not have to pay any charges either for the submission or processing of articles. The journal has adopted the definition of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), which states that the users have the right to read, write down, copy, distribute, print, conduct searches and make direct links with the complete texts of the published articles.
The author responsible for the submission represents all the authors of the work and when the article is sent to the journal, guarantees that he has the permission of his/her co-authors to do so. In the same way, he/she provides an assurance that the article does not infringe authors´ rights and that there are no signs of plagiarism in the work. The journal is not responsible for any opinions that are expressed.
All the articles are published with a Creative Commons License Attribution Non-commercial 4.0 International. The authors hold the copyright of their works and must be contacted directly if there is any commercial interest in the use of their works.
