Tips on guiding kindergarteners to participate in large-group discussions in science
W
hat do you get when you add 20 kindergarten students and a student-led science discussion for the first time? Mass chaos! So, after taking some time to recover, we began to reflect on what we could change to help orchestrate quality science discussions in our kindergarten class. How could we empower young learners to partake in science discussions that would include participating, negotiating, taking turns, and listening to others? From these reflections, a “Science Conversation” plan was formed and implemented. What we found was that student-led discussions can begin in kindergarten. These young students are very capable…and they have a lot to say!
Say Hello to Chaos
Our work together started when Julie, a kindergarten teacher, and Sara, a research assistant, met at a professional development workshop. Julie was searching for
By Julie Sander and Sara Nelson ways to get her students more involved in classroom science conversations and Sara recommended some articles on the topic. Thus, our brainstorming began. We wanted to incorporate student conversations into the district’s science curriculum that covered the topics of push/pull, living/nonliving, sink/float, and sponges. To begin, we focused on the sponge unit. In this unit, students are given the opportunity to observe, sort, compare, measure, and investigate sponges while they engage in the inquiry process. The resource book for this unit is Squishy, Squashy Sponges: Early Childhood Unit Guide for Teachers (Terrific Science Press 2003). Gallas’s (1995) work on “Science Talks” provided us with initial guidance. Additional information on science conversations with children was found in the book Questions, Claims, and Evidence (Norton-Meier, et al. 2008). Both books highlighted how conversations can assist students in developing communication skills and their ability to share and defend their ideas in sciFebruary 2009 43
ence. Anxious to implement student-led discussions in the classroom, Julie shared these thoughts with her 20 kindergarten students: “Class, I want to try something new with you. We are going to be learning about sponges for our science unit, and I need to know what you know about sponges. There are some rules to our sharing time: I want you to talk with each other, pretend I’m not here, look at your friends, listen to what your friends say, and don’t raise your hand. Let’s try it! What do you know about sponges?” The outcome was not what we envisioned. Students were all talking at once, looking directly at the teacher, getting louder and louder. It soon became obvious that more guidance was needed.
Science Talks, Take Two
To improve the quality of our student-led discussions, the following goals were developed after our initial attempt: • Students will take turns sharing science ideas/connections. • Students will talk with each other (not the teacher) about science ideas/connections. • Students will share any disagreements with peer science statements using friendly voices. • Most students will share science ideas/connections. • The teacher will record statements regarding student understanding on a given science subject.
Figure 1.
Photograph courtesy of the authors
Concept map of the science conversation.
With these goals clearly in mind, we implemented our new plan. Students sat in a large circle on the carpet. A small squishy ball determined the speaker and was tossed back and forth between the students. The following rules were shared with the students: • You (students) are the teachers. My job is to write down all of your ideas on sticky notes. • If you (students) are holding the ball, you may share your ideas. I will write down your ideas, and then you must say a classmate’s name before you pass the ball to them (this prevents several children jumping in the middle of the circle and fighting over the object). • Once in awhile, I will ask you (students) to raise your hands if you haven’t shared any ideas. Then, the speaker will pass the ball to a new person. • If you (students) don’t think someone is saying the right thing, you may use your friendly voice and say what you think is right. It’s great to have different ideas and share them. The “ball=speaker” rule was relaxed as time went on to promote a more natural student to student dialogue. Disagreements with peer statements may arise and are encouraged. Students can be initially hesitant to share conflicting opinions, so the teacher may have to recognize student reactions or facial expressions. “Jimmy, I notice you have something to say, please share with the rest of the class.” When there is a disagreement, explain that a a sticky note with a question mark on it will be placed beside the debatable statement and a science experiment may be set up to answer the question. For example, a student wondered, “Do sponges with bigger holes hold more water?” so a sticky note was placed by the statement and students followed up with an activity in which they tested a variety of sponges by filling them with water and emptying the sponge into a cup. Results were recorded on chart paper and discussed. The question mark sticky note was then changed to reflect the results.
Inside a Science Talk
It was our initial talk for our sponges unit and the ball was bouncing around the circle. A very quiet student, Tommy, shared, “Sponges are found in 44 Science and Children
Science Conversations for Young Learners the ocean.” Other students replied, “No they aren’t.” Tommy claimed again, “Yes they are, they are found in the ocean.” More students agreed that sponges are not found in the ocean. Recognizing Tommy’s frustration with the conflict, Julie intervened and said, “Let’s put a question mark next to this idea, and we will search for the answer right away.” The following day, we read the book, Sponges Are Skeletons (1993) by Barbara Juster Esbensen. It was a joy to see the proud look on Tommy’s face when students discovered that natural sponges are indeed found in the ocean. Similar science conversations were continued throughout the unit. We noticed that, with practice, students were soon better able to conduct conversations with less teacher support.
Connecting to the Standards
This article relates to the following National Science Education Standards (NRC 1996): Teaching Standards Standard B: Teachers of science guide and facilitate learning. Standard E: Teachers of science develop communities of science learners that reflect the intellectual rigor of scientific inquiry and the attitudes and social values conducive to science learning. National Research Council (NRC). 1996. National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
Visually Organizing Conversations
To visually organize the conversations, we stapled large sheets of white paper to a bulletin board to record students’ ideas. During the conversation, most of the students’ initial ideas were examples of how sponges are used (e.g., wash tables, cars, body). Based on the students’ statements, we then created a concept map (Figure 1). Ideas about which students did not agree on were placed on the concept map under a question mark. As the unit progressed, students continued to review their ideas and organize their concept map after conversations. Loops of masking tape, linking words (e.g., like, because, and) written on sentence strips, and a marker for connecting lines were made available for the students. Having the students assist with constructing the concept map allowed them to see their science conversation ideas in a more concrete form. For more information on concept mapping, we recommend the book Questions, Claims, and Evidence (Norton-Meier, et al. 2008).
Moving Forward
Initially, we assessed students only on their participation in the science conversations using a checklist that matched-up with our district report card. The checklist listed each student’s name and had a space to write notes about the student. The checklist was helpful during discussions to see at a glance which students were participating. However, as students get more comfortable with the science conversations, the checklist could be adapted to reflect the developing understandings of the content objectives of the unit. Science conversations have been very helpful in providing information on students’ prior knowledge and can be used as often as needed throughout a unit to clarify and share science ideas. Gagnon and Abell (2008) support the importance of science discussions
as part of a quality science program. Our personal observations have noted that science conversations have an amazing effect on students and their role in the classroom. Students recognize that they are in charge of their learning. So let go, enjoy a little chaos, and let your students take control! n Julie Sander (jsander@boone.k12.ia.us) is a kindergarten teacher at Page Elementary in Boone, Iowa. Sara Nelson (sdnelson@iastate.edu), a former elementary teacher, is a graduate assistant at Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa.
Acknowledgment This article was funded in part by a State of Iowa MathScience Partnership Grant administered by Dr. Brian Hand of the University of Iowa and Dr. Lori NortonMeier of Iowa State University. The authors would like to thank them for their support.
References Esbensen, B. 1993. Sponges are skeletons. New York: Harper Collins. Gagnon, M., and S. K. Abell. 2008. Explaining science. Science and Children 45(5): 60–61. Gallas, K. 1995. Talking their way into science: Hearing children’s questions and theories, responding with curricula. New York: Teachers College Press. Norton-Meier, L., B. Hand, L. Hockenberry, and K. Wise. 2008. Questions, claims, and evidence: The important place of argument in children’s science writing. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press. Terrific Science Press. 2003. Squishy, squashy sponges: Early childhood unit guide for teachers. Middletown, OH: Terrific Science Press. February 2009 45