Why We Can't Talk to One Another about Science Education Reform: Even Though Science Teachers and Other Stakeholders All Want Students to Be Instructed in the Most Effective Way Possible, Discussions about What That Way Might Be Are Seldom Productive. the Problem, as Mr. Windschitl Sees It, Is That the Participants Automatically Revert to the "Scripts" of Two Warring Factions. He Suggests a Way to Move the Conversation Forward

By Windschitl, Mark | Phi Delta Kappan, January 2006 | Go to article overview

Why We Can't Talk to One Another about Science Education Reform: Even Though Science Teachers and Other Stakeholders All Want Students to Be Instructed in the Most Effective Way Possible, Discussions about What That Way Might Be Are Seldom Productive. the Problem, as Mr. Windschitl Sees It, Is That the Participants Automatically Revert to the "Scripts" of Two Warring Factions. He Suggests a Way to Move the Conversation Forward


Windschitl, Mark, Phi Delta Kappan


RECENTLY I recalled an incident from some 20 years ago when a fellow middle school science teacher nearly put my eye out. This wasn't an angry encounter. Rather, a group of us had come together in a classroom after school to discuss an article in a professional journal that advocated cooperative learning for students. We had barely begun the conversation when someone made the mistake of mentioning "kids constructing their own knowledge." Immediately I heard a shuffling sound and turned my head just in time to avoid being hit by an enflamed colleague swinging a meterstick back and forth with both hands, like a fireman at a three-story blaze, shouting, "And then--look out! We'll just have to hose off all their crazy ideas and teach them real science!"

This bit of excitement turned out to be just a taste of the controversies to come as our science department engaged in passionate discussions during the school year over reform issues like student-centered teaching and inquiry learning--discussions that were typically disappointing and often divisive. I wondered, "Whenever we consider changing the status quo in classrooms, what is it about the way we talk to one another that makes discourse so unproductive?"

In the years since, I have listened intently during dozens of school board sessions, textbook-adoption meetings, and science department retreats where participants have used closely held beliefs, values, and images to stake out positions on issues of instruction and curriculum. What I have found in these conversations is that, despite a number of shared goals for student learning that participants bring to the table and despite the shared understanding that there are as many ways to teach as there are teachers, the dialogue about science education quickly and inevitably reaches a stalemate in a contest between two irreconcilable scripts. For lack of more colorful terms I will refer to them as "traditional talk" and "reform talk." It is this rhetorical bottleneck that I want to explore here, using a recent experience with such a conversation as an illustration. First, however, some background is necessary.

Roughly speaking, traditional talk focuses on student acquisition of scientific facts, concepts, principles, and skills. It argues that the classroom works most efficiently when teachers give clear explanations of scientific ideas and guide students through carefully controlled laboratory experiences. Reform talk, on the other hand, emphasizes that teachers must challenge and build upon students' existing ideas, as well as offer authoritative explanations of scientific phenomena. Reform talk further argues that students are often capable of making sense of scientific ideas on their own or in concert with other students and that learners can best understand the processes of science by conducting their own investigations.

At this point, I have probably insulted readers who consider themselves reformers or traditionalists and left the rest wondering where I get off inventing simple-minded caricatures of such complex positions. Please bear in mind, however, that I am not referring to actual teaching practices. I am referring instead to two streams of talk that get activated when people with different beliefs, values, and backgrounds come together to discuss the possibility of departing from business as usual in their school's science classrooms.

Of course, when people discuss such issues (e.g., how standards will be implemented in their school or whether to use curriculum kits), they feel as compelled to belittle the views of those different from themselves as they do to explain why their visions of teaching should dictate new directions (or preserve the old). Traditional talk, then, often casts reform classrooms as experimental, child-indulgent free-for-alls, while reform voices criticize traditionalist approaches as rigid, authoritarian, and outmoded. What is remarkable about these conversations, apart from the predictability with which participants play out such scripts, is the historical regularity of similar arguments. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Why We Can't Talk to One Another about Science Education Reform: Even Though Science Teachers and Other Stakeholders All Want Students to Be Instructed in the Most Effective Way Possible, Discussions about What That Way Might Be Are Seldom Productive. the Problem, as Mr. Windschitl Sees It, Is That the Participants Automatically Revert to the "Scripts" of Two Warring Factions. He Suggests a Way to Move the Conversation Forward
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.