- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Social positioning in small group interactions in an investigative science learning environment physics class

David T. Brookes

Yuehai Yang

Binod Nainabasti

  • Department of Physics, California State University, Chico, 400 W. 1st Street, Chico, California 95929-0202, USA

  • Department of Natural Sciences, Oregon Institute of Technology, 3201 Campus Drive, Klamath Falls, Oregon 97601, USA

  • Department of Physics, Lamar University, 4400 MLK Parkway, Beaumont, Texas 77705, USA

PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010103 – Published 25 January, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010103

Abstract

We conducted a semester-long ethnographic study of group work in a physics class that implemented the investigative science learning environment approach. Students’ conversations were videotaped while they were engaged in group learning activities. Our primary research goal was to better understand what factors made some groups more effective than others. We developed a coding scheme that uses particular modality markers such as hedging and upward inflection to identify how students position themselves in these group conversations. Additionally we quantified group effectiveness by how many key ideas in a particular activity a group negotiated and resolved through the course of their conversation. This research builds on theories of social positioning that posit that groups are more effective when their discussion is more equitable. Our exploratory study indicates that groups whose participants position themselves in a more equitable way, are more effective at completing challenging physics activities and resolving areas of confusion that arise.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (44)

  1. E. Etkina and A. Van Heuvelen, Investigative science learning environment–A science process approach to learning physics, in Research-Based Reform of University Physics, Vol. 1, edited by E. F. Redish and P. J. Cooney (2007), https://www.per-central.org/items/detail.cfm?ID=4988.
  2. J. M. Wilson, The CUPLE physics studio, Phys. Teach. 32, 518 (1994).
  3. E. Etkina, Millikan Award lecture: Students of physics—Listeners, observers, or collaborative participants in physics scientific practices?, Am. J. Phys. 83, 669 (2015).
  4. E. Etkina, A. Karelina, M. Ruibal-Villasenor, D. Rosengrant, R. Jordan, and C. E. Hmelo-Silver, Design and reflection help students develop scientific abilities: Learning in introductory physics laboratories, J. Learn. Sci. 19, 54 (2010).
  5. D. T. Brookes, E. Etkina, and G. Planinsic, Implementing an epistemologically authentic approach to student-centered inquiry learning, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 020148 (2020).
  6. K. Bielaczyc and A. Collins, Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice, in Instructional Design Theories and Models, Vol. II, edited by C. M. Reigeluth (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1999), Chap. 12, pp. 269–292.
  7. D. M. Desbien, Modeling discourse management compared to other classroom management styles in university physics, Ph.D. Thesis, Arizona State University, 2002.
  8. B. E. Hinrichs, Sharp initial disagreements then consensus in a student led whole-class discussion, in Proceedings of the 2013 Physics Education Research Conference, edited by P. V. Engelhardt, A. D. Churukian, and D. L. Jones (AIP, New York, 2014), pp. 181–184.
  9. B. G. Glaser and A. L. Strauss, The Discovery of Grounded Theory (Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago, 1967).
  10. B. Nainabasti, D. T. Brookes, Y. Yang, and Y. Lin, Connection between participation in an Interactive Learning Environment and learning through teamwork, in Proceedings of the 2015 Physics Education Research Conference, edited by A. D. Churukian, D. L. Jones, and L. Ding (AIP, New York, 2015), pp. 231–234.
  11. B. Nainabasti, D. T. Brookes, and Y. Yang, Students’ participation and its relationship to success in an Interactive Learning Environment, in Proceedings of the 2014 Physics Education Research Conference, edited by P. V. Engelhardt, A. D. Churukian, and D. L. Jones (AIP, New York, 2015), pp. 195–198.
  12. A. Sfard, When the rules of discourse change, but nobody tells you: Making sense of mathematics learning from a commognitive standpoint, J. Learn. Sci. 16, 565 (2007).
  13. M. Scardamalia and C. Bereiter, Computer support for knowledge-building communities, J. Learn. Sci. 3, 265 (1994).
  14. J. Lave and E. Wenger, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1991).
  15. B. Rogoff, E. Matusov, and C. White, Models of teaching and learning: Participation in a community of learners, in Handbook of Education and Human Development, edited by D. R. Olson and N. Torrance (Blackwell, Oxford, UK, 1996), Chap. 18, pp. 388–414.
  16. A. Van Heuvelen, Learning to think like a physicist: A review of research-based instructional strategies, Am. J. Phys. 59, 891 (1991).
  17. J. Airey and C. Linder, Social semiotics in university physics education, in Multiple Representations in Physics Education, edited by D. F. Treagust, R. Duit, and H. E. Fisher (Springer Nature, Cham, Switzerland, 2017), Chap. 5, pp. 95–122.
  18. E. Etkina, D. T. Brookes, and G. Planinsic, Investigative Science Learning Environment when Learning Physics Mirrors Doing Physics (Morgan & Claypool, San Rafael, CA, 2019).
  19. C. A. Chinn and B. A. Malhotra, Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks, Sci. Educ. 86, 175 (2002).
  20. R. Wageman, Interdependence and group effectiveness, Admin. Sci. Quart. 40, 145 (1995).
  21. P. Van den Bossche, W. H. Gijselaers, M. Segers, and P. A. Kirschner, Social and cognitive factors driving teamwork in collaborative learning environments: Team learning beliefs and behaviors, Small Gr. Res. 37, 490 (2006).
  22. J. Roschelle, Learning by collaborating: Convergent conceptual change, J. Learn. Sci. 2, 235 (1992).
  23. B. Barron, When smart groups fail, J. Learn. Sci. 12, 307 (2003).
  24. M. Menekse and M. T. H. Chi, The role of collaborative interactions versus individual construction on students’ learning of engineering concepts, Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 44, 702 (2019).
  25. D. Mesch, D. W. Johnson, and R. Johnson, Impact of positive interdependence and academic group contingencies on achievement, J. Soc. Psychol. 128, 345 (1988).
  26. S. T. Bossert, Cooperative activities in the classroom, Rev. Res. Educ. 15, 225 (1988).
  27. A. Williams Woolley, C. F. Chabris, A. Pentland, N. Hashmi, and T. W. Malone, Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups, Science 330, 686 (2010).
  28. A. Edmondson, Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams, Admin. Sci. Quart. 44, 350 (1999).
  29. J. Rozovsky, The five keys to a successful Google team (2015), https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/.
  30. I. Esmonde, Ideas and identities: Supporting equity in cooperative mathematics learning, Rev. Educ. Res. 79, 1008 (2009).
  31. N. Bonderup Dohn, Explaining the significance of participationist approaches for understanding students’ knowledge acquisition, Educ. Psychol. 51, 188 (2016).
  32. L. D. Conlin and R. E. Scherr, Making space to sensemake: Epistemic distancing in small group physics discussions, Cognit. Instr. 36, 396 (2018).
  33. A. R. Fragale, The power of powerless speech: The effects of speech style and task interdependence on status conferral, Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. 101, 243 (2006).
  34. E. Karkkainen, Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity, Text Talk 26, 699 (2006).
  35. M. A. K. Halliday, An Introduction to Functional Grammar (Edward Arnold, London, 1985).
  36. E. Etkina, D. Brookes, G. Planinsic, and A. Van Heuvelen, Active Learning Guide for College Physics: Explore and Apply, 2nd ed. (Pearson, San Francisco, CA, 2019).
  37. L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1978).
  38. R. J. Beichner, J. M. Saul, D. S. Abbott, J. J. Morse, D. L. Deardorff, R. J. Allain, S. W. Bonham, M. H. Dancy, and J. S. Risley, Student-Centered Activities for Large Enrollment Undergraduate Programs (SCALE-UP) project, in Research-Based Reform of University Physics, Vol. 1, edited by E. F. Redish and P. J. Cooney (2007), https://www.per-central.org/items/detail.cfm?ID=4517.
  39. D. Lakens et al., Justify your alpha, Nature Human Behav. 2, 168 (2018).
  40. J. Cohen, A power primer, Psychol. Bull. 112, 155 (1992).
  41. R. E. Scherr and D. Hammer, Student behavior and epistemological framing: Examples from collaborative active-learning activities in physics, Cognit. Instr. 27, 147 (2009).
  42. D. T. Brookes, B. E. Hinrichs, and J. L. Nass, Social positioning correlates with consensus building in two contentious large-group meetings, in Proceedings of the 2019 Physics Education Research Conference, Provo, UT, edited by Y. Cao, S. Wolf, and M. B. Bennett (AIP, New York, 2020).
  43. K. Tobin and W.-M. Roth, Implementing coteaching and cogenerative dialoguing in urban science education, School Sci. Math. 105, 313 (2005).
  44. K. Tobin, Fostering science learning in diverse urban settings, in Proceedings of the 2008 Physics Education Research Conference, Vol. 1064, edited by C. Henderson, M. Sabella, and L. Hsu (AIP, New York, 2008), pp. 50–52.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010103– Published 25 January, 2021
  • Received 17 August 2020
  • Accepted 8 January 2021
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation