Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 99–116 | Cite as

Science Students Creating Hybrid Spaces when Engaging in an Expo Investigation Project

  • Umesh Ramnarain
  • Josef de Beer
Article

Abstract

In this paper, we report on the experiences of three 9th-grade South African students (13–14 years) in doing open science investigation projects for a science expo. A particular focus of this study was the manner in which these students merge the world of school science with their social world to create a hybrid space by appropriating knowledge and resources of the school and home. Within this hybrid space they experienced a deeper, more meaningful and authentic engagement in science practical work. This hybrid space redefined the landscape of the science learning experience for these students, as they could derive the twofold benefit of appropriating support when necessary and at the same time maintain their autonomy over the investigation. For South Africa and quite probably other countries; these findings serve as a guideline as to how opportunities can be created for students to do open science investigations, against prevailing school factors such as large classes, a lack of physical resources, the lack of time for practical work and the demands of syllabus coverage.

Keywords

Third space Hybrid space Science practical work Science investigations Science projects Science expo 

References

  1. Aikenead, G. S. (2007). Humanistic perspectives in the science curriculum. In K. S. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 881–910). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places and pursuits. Washington: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bellocchi, A. (2009). Learning in the third space: A sociocultural perspective on learning with analogies. Unublished doctoral dissertation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane.Google Scholar
  4. Brabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Bencze, L., & Hodson, D. (1999). Changing practice by changing practice: oward more authentic science and science curriculum development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 521–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berliner, D. (2002). Educational research: the hardest science of all. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 18–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Braund, M., & Reiss, M. (2006). Towards a more authentic science curriculum: the contribution of out-of-school learning. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1378–1388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Calabrese Barton, A., & Tan, E. (2009). Funds of knowledge and discourses and hybrid space. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 50–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Calabrese Barton, A., Tan, E., & Rivet, A. (2008). Creating hybrid spaces for engaging school science among urban middle school girls. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 68–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2002). Research methods in education (5th ed.). London: Routledge and Falmer.Google Scholar
  11. Deboer, G. (2002). Student-centred teaching in standards-based world: finding a sensible balance. Science Education, 11, 405–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Duggan, S., & Gott, R. (2002). What sort of science education do we really need? International Journal of Science Education, 24, 661–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fairbrother, R., & Hackling, M. (1997). Is this the right answer? International Journal of Science Education, 19(8), 887–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discources (2nd ed.). London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  15. Gibson, H. L., & Chase, C. (2002). Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students’ attitudes toward science. Science Education, 86(5), 693–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gutirérez, K. D., Baquedano-Lopéz, P., Alvarez, H. H., & Chiu, M. M. (1999). Building a culture of collaboration through hybrid language practices. Theory into Practice, 38(2), 87–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haigh, M. (2007). Can investigative practical work in high school Biology foster creativity? Research in Science Education, 37(2), 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Haigh, M., France, B., & Forret, M. (2005). Is ‘doing science’ in New Zealand classrooms an expression of scientific inquiry? International Journal of Science Education, 27(2), 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hailman, J. P. (1975). The scientific method: modus operandi or Supreme Court? The American Biology Teacher, 37(5), 309–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hattingh, A., Aldous, C., & Rogan, J. (2007). Some factors influencing the quality of practical work in science classrooms. African Journal of Research in SMT Education, 11(1), 75–90.Google Scholar
  21. Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: foundations for the 21st century. Science Education, 88, 28–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (Eds.). (1991). Situated learning, Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Maor, D. F., & Fraser, B. J. (1996). Use of classroom environment perceptions in evaluating inquiry-based computer-assisted learning. International Journal of Science Education, 18(4), 401–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Minner, D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Moje, E. B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., & Marx, R. W. (2001). “Maestro, what is quality?”: language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(4), 469–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third space in content area literacy: an examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 38–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Onwu, G., & Stoffels, N. (2005). Instructional functions in large, under-resourced science classes: perspectives of South African teachers. Perspectives in Education, 23(3), 79–91.Google Scholar
  28. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Roth, W.-M. (1995). Authentic school science: Knowing and learning in open-inquiry laboratories. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sadeh, I., & Zion, M. (2009). The development of dynamic inquiry performances within an open inquiry setting: a comparison to guided inquiry setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(10), 1137–1160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schmidt, S. M. (2003). Learning by doing: teaching the process of inquiry. Science Scope, 27(1), 27–30.Google Scholar
  32. Seopa, M. A., Laugksch, R. C., Aldridge, J. M., & Fraser, B. J. (2003, January). Development of an instrument to monitor the success of outcomes-based learning environments in science classrooms in South Africa. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, East London, South Africa.Google Scholar
  33. Smit, B. (2002). Atlas.ti for qualitative data analysis. Perspectives in Education, 20(3), 65–75.Google Scholar
  34. Trumbull, D. J., Scarano, G., & Bonney, R. (2006). Relations among two teachers’ practices and beliefs, conceptualizations of the nature of science, and their implementation of student independent inquiry projects. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1717–1750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Trundle, K. C., Atwood, R. K., Christopher, J. E., & Sackes, M. (2010). The effect of guided inquiry-based instruction on middle school students understanding of lunar concepts. Research in Science Education, 40(3), 451–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Van Eijck, M. W., & Roth, W.-M. (2009). Authentic science experiences as a vehicle to change students’ orientations towards science and scientific career choices: learning from the path followed by Brad. Curriculum Studies of Science Education, 4, 611–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematics, Science, Technology and Computer Education, Faculty of Education, Auckland Park Kingsway CampusUniversity of JohannesburgAuckland ParkSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations