The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons
Science Education, 90 (4):
605--631 (2006)DOI: 10.1002/sce.20131
Abstract
In this paper, we draw upon a framework for analyzing the discursive interactions of science classrooms (Mortimer & Scott, 2003, Meaning Making in Secondary Science Classrooms, Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press), to probe the movement between authoritative and dialogic discourse in a Brazilian high school science class. More specifically, we argue the point that such shifts between communicative approaches are an inevitable part of teaching whose purpose is to support meaningful learning of scientific knowledge. We suggest that a necessary tension therefore exists between authoritative and dialogic approaches as dialogic exchanges are followed by authoritative interventions (to develop the canonical scientific view), and the authoritative introduction of new ideas is followed by the opportunity for dialogic application and exploration of those ideas. In these ways, one communicative approach follows from the other, authoritativeness acting as a seed for dialogicity and vice versa. We discuss how this analysis, in terms of shifts in communicative approach, offers a new and complementary perspective on supporting “productive disciplinary engagement” (Engle & Conant, 2002, Cognition and Instruction, 20, 399–484) in the classroom. Finally we consider some methodological issues arising from this study. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed90:605–631, 2006
Description
This is somewhat similar to Hanrahan's paper about Hybridity in secondary school science classrooms. The authors discuss how meaning making can move from everyday language to academic language and how this is shared. They also look at parameters and challenges of collaborative discourse and provide a table comparing and contrasting both approaches.
