View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

A Researcher-Student-Teacher Model for Democratic Science Pedagogy: Connections to Community, Shared Authority, and Critical Science Agency

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: A Researcher-Student-Teacher Model for Democratic Science Pedagogy: Connections to Community, Shared Authority, and Critical Science Agency
Language: English
Authors: Basu, S. Jhumki
Source: Equity & Excellence in Education. 2010 43(1):72-87.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 16
Publication Date: 2010
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Descriptive
Education Level: Secondary Education
Descriptors: Social Justice, Educational Practices, Democratic Values, Teaching Methods, Science Instruction, Models, Interviews, Observation, Power Structure, Immigrants, Secondary School Students, Secondary School Teachers, Teacher Attitudes, Student Attitudes, Urban Schools
DOI: 10.1080/10665680903489379
ISSN: 1066-5684
Abstract: This article presents a model for democratic pedagogy in science classrooms that is based on an examination of existing literature on democratic educational practices and on teacher and student ideas about how this pedagogy can take shape and be operationalized in science classrooms. A goal of democratic science pedagogy is to explore ways of teaching science for social justice among diverse school populations by drawing on the ideas and assets of students and teachers. Drawing upon interview and observational data, the model shows democratic science pedagogy as centered in constructions of community, shared authority, and critical science agency--students relying on subject-matter knowledge to make change and to redress power differentials in their lives. (Contains 2 tables, 2 figures, and 2 notes. This article was written with Angela Calabrese Barton.)
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 25
Entry Date: 2010
Accession Number: EJ879309
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFBFefnQ374HmwjEEsysDMyAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDC12FbakSZVpmRDcfgIBEICBmr54jTi22K7-iV9Fwkix5ruAZn31YQAle7L3pqbn8by1r-_5QywXdDq1hNicZQ2_r9-vluQ5t2G79D-8Xi39hrGlRRDj7XnFys2pAdTUa_y6sR7GdzoMLobDapZxytBumo3-wYXAV3HUlE-ycVLI-23d9A6u-n5BIOa1tPiVRaAJZXdp8KOzdDSWD10AuewldA5B0Nj6BakZ3zI=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0047926815;eie01jan.10;2019Feb27.08:50;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0047926815-1">A Researcher-Student-Teacher Model for Democratic Science Pedagogy: Connections to Community, Shared Authority, and Critical Science Agency. </title> <sbt id="AN0047926815-2">WHY INVESTIGATE DEMOCRATIC SCIENCE PEDAGOGY?</sbt> <p>This article presents a model for democratic pedagogy in science classrooms that is based on an examination of existing literature on democratic educational practices and on teacher and student ideas about how this pedagogy can take shape and be operationalized in science classrooms. A goal of democratic science pedagogy is to explore ways of teaching science for social justice among diverse school populations by drawing on the ideas and assets of students and teachers. Drawing upon interview and observational data, the model shows democratic science pedagogy as centered in constructions of community, shared authority, and critical science agency—students relying on subject-matter knowledge to make change and to redress power differentials in their lives.</p> <p>At the School for Social Change (SSC), located in a low-income, Caribbean, immigrant neighborhood in a large, urban center in the northeast U.S., Hannah is a fourth-year, white, middle-school, science teacher from a rural background who graduated from an Ivy League university with a degree in geology. While enrolled in the district's sponsored alternative certification program, she instructed 6th grade Earth Science and 8th grade Materials Science students as well as prepared 8th grade students for the state exit exam. She spent a summer studying geology at a lab in California and, based on this experience, developed curriculum and materials for projects in her Materials Science class that required students to conduct their own investigations.</p> <p>One Wednesday afternoon, when I entered Hannah's class, students in her Materials Science class were involved in creating biodegradable materials that function as well as non-biodegradable plastic. They were acting as scientists who were investigating the construction and properties of different materials with the purpose of designing a product that was hard to tear and therefore good for packaging but also was environmentally-friendly. The activity allowed students to think creatively because they could craft and test their own materials and compare their products to plastic. Hannah's classroom is one where the teacher and students share authority, to some degree. She provides students with choices in their final assessments, and they can express their opinions on what types of homework they prefer. She situates questions in contexts with which students are familiar. For example, one of her questions about packaging related to a student finding the best way to take home an oily sandwich. Hannah, in this particular lesson, also exposes students to cutting-edge science content—the concept of polymers, the process of invention, and the dilemma of creating biodegradable materials in a world increasingly concerned with the impact of human populations on the environment.</p> <p>Hannah also has aspirations for growth in how she shares authority with students. She wants to have students create questions for the quizzes she gives them about each unit and have them vote on the order of units each year, types of final projects, and what field trips to take.</p> <p>In a world of standardized test pressures, poor pay, and classroom management challenges, co-creating her science class by soliciting students' ideas has been an essential part of Hannah's identity as a teacher, a way for her to keep the needs and interests of her diverse students at the forefront of her priorities, and a process by which to move them forward in the world of science education and science as an act of social justice. Hannah often talked about caring about what students want and think, and so it was not surprising to us that youth are often in her classroom at lunch and after school and seem to work hard at the complex scientific knowledge- and inquiry-based tasks she poses to them. Talking to Hannah convinced me that key to her success in engaging students in science and in helping them to achieve is what I have called <emph>democratic science pedagogy.</emph> Hannah's version of democratic science pedagogy incorporated student voice, sharing authority with youth, drawing on students' lived experiences, providing students with structured choices, and providing students (low-income, ethnic minority students) with access to science opportunities.</p> <hd id="AN0047926815-3">PURPOSE OF THE STUDY</hd> <p>This research project is a multi-year investigation of how democratic science pedagogy takes shape in science classrooms and influences student and teacher learning and engagement in science education. This article is a first step in exploring this set of teaching practices. In response to a history in which urban, low-income, ethnic minority students have been denied choice and voice in how their school and science experiences develop, this research is situated in the belief that teaching and learning are meaningful, authentic, and just when they are more than a set of top-down prescriptions and, instead, reflect the beliefs, ideas, and creativity of the teachers and students involved in practice. As such, our specific goal is to understand how teachers and students interpret and enact democratic science pedagogy, beyond the existing descriptions of democratic education in the literature. The research question that guides this study is: How do students and teachers envision and operationalize democratic science pedagogy?</p> <p>Implicit in this type of investigation is the assumption that different actors can interpret and enact the same idea differently, despite labeling it identically. Answering the question above will allow a more accurate assessment of the impact of democratic science pedagogy on student and teacher learning and engagement, and will contribute to a rich, multi-perspective understanding of this topic that captures not only how researchers theorize this idea but also how teachers and students actually put it into practice.</p> <hd id="AN0047926815-4">A LITERATURE-BASED MODEL OF DEMOCRATIC SCIENCE PEDAGOGY</hd> <p>A vast political literature exists on the definitions of democracy ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref1">11</reflink>]). A democratic system includes the legal protection of rights, such as property, "speech and participation in the political process" ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref2">21</reflink>], p. 636). Essential to democracy are the principles of "neutrality: no choice alternative is given a favored position ex ante)" and "anonymity: no person is given a special position ex ante" ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref3">11</reflink>], p. 3). Democracy also entails the protection of minorities. Rawls ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref4">19</reflink>]/1971) extends this idea to empowerment of marginalized groups, emphasizing the promotion of justice as an essential feature of a democratic society.</p> <p>Why should educators apply democratic theory to science classrooms? Low-income, ethnic minority students face significant challenges in gaining access to and succeeding in science classrooms and careers ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref5">15</reflink>]). For example, minority groups are vastly underrepresented in the number of degrees awarded in the physical sciences, computer science, and engineering ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref6">14</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref7">16</reflink>]). Meanwhile, there is a recent but rich set of research studies that reveal how and why youth from linguistic and cultural minority backgrounds and from low-income backgrounds sometimes choose to disengage from school science or perceive themselves as marginal to science or school science ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref8">3</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref9">5</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref10">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref11">24</reflink>]). For example, Brown found that minority students struggle with the language used in science classrooms and often do not identify with science discourse. In particular, his study simultaneously reveals how, for some ethnic minority students, participation in the cultural practices of science classrooms created intrapersonal conflict, yielding four domains of discursive identities: opposition status, maintenance status, incorporation status, and proficiency status. Ethnic minority students code switch within this continuum of discourse identities in response to peer pressure and cultural conflicts, manifesting substantial resistance towards endorsed scientific discourse, which "implicated the value of conceptualizing discourse as an artifact of individual identity" ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref12">3</reflink>], p. 830). This study shows that the culture of school science can marginalize low-income and minority students from learning science.</p> <p>In traditional classrooms, teachers are engaged in a power relationship with students in which they profoundly constrain the actions and choices of students ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref13">7</reflink>]). However, with the intention of increasing the voice and success of marginalized youth in school, some authors propose a less authoritarian, more democratic relationship between teachers and students in which students have increased choice, voice, and authority ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref14">13</reflink>]).</p> <p>Key to democracy is the notion of constituents having rights. Traditional science classrooms limit students to being consumers of knowledge who are expected to memorize facts selected as important by their teacher ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref15">9</reflink>]). However, science can be viewed as a tentative discipline in which different evidence-based opinions compete for status. If exposing students to the process of doing science is indeed given worth in science education, free speech becomes an important tool through which students can engage in debate about competing evidence-based ideas, rather than accepting facts as they are provided.</p> <p>Democracy also implies a right to property. One can envision this principle broadly as respect for students' intellectual property, the prior knowledge of science that students bring to the classroom from their cultures and home lives, their funds of knowledge ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref16">12</reflink>]). Recognition of students' funds of knowledge is in contrast to common classroom practices where low-income, ethnic minority students are seen as deficient in knowledge and skills. To evaluate how teachers value and use students' intellectual property, one can document when and how often curriculum is situated in students' life experiences, home lives, backgrounds, and cultural and social identities—the students' funds of knowledge. A recent study by [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref17">6</reflink>] reveals that when a teacher purposefully adapted curriculum to build on students' funds of knowledge, students engaged qualitatively and quantitatively differently in science class, taking up scientific discourse more frequently and substantiating claims with evidence.</p> <p>[<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref18">7</reflink>] describes the exercise of power as an interaction between people in which the actions of one person shape the possible ways in which another person can act. This view of power captures the traditional relationship between teachers and students in which students have limited opportunity to participate in classroom decisions. In a democratic pedagogy model, students have a right to shape curriculum and practices in their classrooms ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref19">13</reflink>]). One indicator of shared power is the degree to which students express voice. To assess youth rights in science classrooms and to investigate when and how the democratic idea of anonymity is upheld, one can measure how, when, and why students express voice, especially as evidence-based opinion, and also document how and when teachers cultivate and leverage what students express their ideas and opinions.</p> <p>The principle of neutrality can apply to science classrooms in that students would have choice in what and how they learn rather than the teacher entirely choosing curricula, topics, and strategies for pedagogy. Choice is important for student learning—youth improve their abilities to tackle new problems in science when they shape their own inquiries ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref20">1</reflink>]). With regard to neutrality, one can investigate the number and types of choice available to students in their science classrooms, particularly in how they learn and apply science knowledge and inquiry processes.</p> <p>[<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref21">5</reflink>] describes liberatory science education, in which science education is structured around "students [being] central in the knowing and doing of science" (p. 298) rather than at the periphery because their primary discourses are different from school science. [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref22">25</reflink>] propose a strategy for redressing injustice in education, on which I draw in this study, in which students engage in <emph>critical subject agency</emph> (in this case, critical science agency), becoming subject-matter experts and leveraging knowledge to reflect and act on injustice in their lives.</p> <p>With respect to promoting social justice, one can examine when, why, and how often students: (a) investigate science and science education from a "critical" lens, documenting issues of power and injustice; (b) demonstrate subject-matter expertise[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref23">1</reflink>] and rigorous knowledge of content and nature of science issues; (c) demonstrate engagement[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref24">2</reflink>]; and (d) leverage subject expertise to reflect and act on injustice in their lives.</p> <hd id="AN0047926815-5">CONTEXT</hd> <p>The research for this study took place at the School for Social Change, a grade 6–12 institution located in a Caribbean immigrant neighborhood in a large, urban center in the northeastern U.S. The school is one of four housed in what used to be a large, single campus that was closed by the city because of a poor graduation rate (approximately 40%). The school has been open for almost four years and focuses on the following themes in its mission: school as democracy, building relationships and engagement among students, empowering students to make social change, and preparing students for college.</p> <p>I spent a great deal of time at the school in different roles. In 2003–2004 she worked on the planning team of the school, helping develop its mission and initial operating systems. For the following two years, she worked as a physics teacher at the school and took on the role of acting assistant principal, which included tasks, such as scheduling, ordering, professional development, and mentoring for new math and science teachers. From 2006–2008, she worked each week at the school as a researcher and a source of professional development for science teachers. She helped teachers plan the science fair, organize their curricula for the year, team-teach lessons, and support students struggling in science and math. She was particularly close to the graduating class of 2008 whom she had known for four years.</p> <p>Most students are immigrants of black Caribbean origin, from countries like Jamaica and Trinidad and the island of St. Lucia. Seventy percent of the students received reduced-fee or free lunch. Almost all speak English as a first language, though many need various forms of literacy support for reading and writing in formal American English. Each student at the school takes three years of science in the middle school and four years in the high school, an exception to most city schools, which require fewer years of science instruction. High school students are also exposed to biology, physics, and chemistry, a rarity in the city's schools, and the school has a plan also to offer earth science next year.</p> <p>During the study, teachers at the school were a mixture of white, black, Asian, and Latino and from a range of class backgrounds. For example, Carey, one of the teachers in this study, struggled financially and personally to attend college, which she felt helped her relate to the challenges of her students. Other teachers attended Ivy League colleges and saw teaching as a vocation for making positive change in the world. Two of the teachers were in their first year of teaching; two were in their second year; one each were in their third and fourth year; and one teacher had taught for close to a decade in schools in Jamaica and the U.S. The teachers' subjects ranged from living environment (biology) in preparation for the state exam to forensics and microbiology electives in the 12th grade.</p> <p>As with any school, students were diverse in their participation in the life of the school and in their academic performance. For example, Leonard, in the 10th grade, had recently immigrated to the U.S. and was very quiet in class because he was conscious of his pronounced accent and his unfamiliarity with American dialect. Tanisha, in the 11th grade, was a strong confident student who was on the honor roll and had, at the time of the study, applied to participate in cancer research at a local university. The study included a cohort of 6th grade girls bubbling over with energy and enthusiasm about working with their science teacher and ten 12th grade students who wanted to participate in the study partially because they knew me from my time as a teacher at the school.</p> <hd id="AN0047926815-6">METHODS</hd> <p>The study began in spring 2007 with the recruitment of 6 teachers and 21 students for participation in the study, which included interviews, participation in focus groups, classroom observations, and collection of artifacts. The study began with teachers and students jointly participating in a professional development workshop in which they engaged in in-depth conversations about literature on democratic pedagogy that showcased what educators in non-science disciplines have done in this field, discussed examples I had compiled from previous research of this practice in action, and allowed participating teachers and students to develop definitions of this idea for their classrooms. A teacher at one of the schools has named these focus groups "The Teacher-Student Democratic Science Collaborative."</p> <p>While this session was rich and productive, students were generally less vocal than teachers; the group was large, and teachers reported feeling uncomfortable having a completely honest discussion in the presence of students. In light of this feedback, I decided to conduct separate focus groups for teachers and students in which they defined democracy and defined democratic pedagogy in the context of their own classrooms. In both cases, I asked the teachers or the youth (as appropriate) to define the idea of democracy and to describe how their science classroom might look if it were democratic from the perspective of both teachers and students. The purpose of this question was to operationalize democracy in science from a student and a teacher perspective, and to encourage both teachers and students to think about the other players in co-construction of democratic science classrooms. I further asked both the teachers and the students to describe three recommendations they would make regarding how they would want to enhance democratic practices in their own classrooms. Once I had documented each participant's opinion, she then had teachers and students within the same grade meet again to discuss what they had generated in their separate focus groups. I felt this made the process more equitable, because documenting each student's voice on video and paper (to which the grade-level groups had to refer) made it more likely that student voice was treated on par with teacher voice. I also interviewed each participant separately about his or her definition of democracy.</p> <p>The series of focus groups and interviews described above are the source of the data in this study. Grounded theory was used to analyze data ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref25">23</reflink>]). Specifically, emergent themes were searched for in how teachers and students define democracy and the findings were used to build a more robust, rich model of how democratic science pedagogy takes shape in the minds of participants in schools. Participants in the focus groups continued after the defining democracy session to choose particular interventions to enact in their respective science classrooms.</p> <hd id="AN0047926815-7">HOW TEACHERS AND STUDENTS ENVISION DEMOCRATIC SCIENCE PEDAGOGY</hd> <p>In the following sections, I discuss how teachers and students defined democracy and democratic pedagogy in science and then proposed suggestions for how they envisioned their science classrooms becoming more democratic. I focus first on student responses and then on teachers. In the subsequent section, I use these data to develop an expanded model of democratic science pedagogy.</p> <hd id="AN0047926815-8">How Students Interpret the Idea of Democracy Science Pedagogy</hd> <p>The students presented three main themes that described democratic science pedagogy: freedom and choice, community and caring, and leadership.</p> <p>The first recurring construct that emerged in how students defined democracy was one of freedom and choice. Students across grades 6 to12 defined democracy as "freedom of speech," "freedom to have what you want to have happen," "choice" and "a say in what goes on around you." This theme resonates with the literature-based definition of democracy proposed earlier, where an aspect of democratic science pedagogy was that students would have a right to free speech in their classroom and to choice in what they learn. So, in this instance the literature-based model and student ideas align. However, as discussed below, the students' narratives on democratic practice refine and challenge the theory to take into account their personal histories and desires in and for school.</p> <p>Across grades, students, in describing democratic science classrooms, excitedly discussed a vast range of choices: more field trips that would take them to the sea and the zoo, opportunities to decorate their classrooms in ways that matched the science topics they were studying, more hands-on activities that were messy (included dissection) and involved building things and ideas, a desire for lessons that were more enjoyable (in the style of a game) and for more readings that connected with the interests of young people. The last suggestion ties to the literature-based model of democratic science pedagogy in that students were asking for readings to connect to their own funds of knowledge.</p> <p>Students had suggestions (and debates) about how to structure assessments. Shomani in 7th grade and Alice in 12th grade debated with each other during one of the group conversations whether projects were more engaging, despite requiring more work. Nicholas wanted a pop quiz every day so he would be encouraged to study every night, while Monique asked for a focused study guide for her quizzes. Kingston said, "We should have choice on our questions on the test. I would like to get to choose between questions." Meanwhile, Candice requested that students be able to contribute suggestions to the pool of test questions from which her teacher would select.</p> <p>These examples reveal that students desire freedom "from" different conditions, and "for" different purposes. Some students focused more on "what" or "how" they might learn science—by going to the zoo or having more hands-on activities, while others focused more on issues related to identity and representation: What should the classroom look like? How should my teacher assess my abilities? Who can I be in my classroom? Freedom is, therefore, related to the process of coming to be, both in how that process manifests as well as what accomplishments are welcomed in the classroom.</p> <p>The second main theme related to community and caring. Many students associated democracy with the ideal of community. For example, Sheniqua, a 6th grader, described democracy as "friendship and being kind to one another," and Nina, another 6th grader, discussed the idea of "people working together to try and build a community." This idea of caring was not limited to younger students. Mary, in the 10th grade, talked about democracy as "working together" and "sharing"; Natalie, in the 11th grade, phrased her definition of democracy as "everyone coming together around an idea." Tantenjia defined democracy as "everybody is able to take part." And finally, Alecia associated democracy with "peace" and a "community of people."</p> <p>Community took on distinct manifestations in how the students discussed democratic science classrooms. As the quotes above clearly indicate, students in this study associated democracy with a theme of caring and community. This theme resonates with existing literature described by [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref26">17</reflink>] in which she describes care as central to all aspects of human life and especially important in education. [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref27">2</reflink>] write in their study about the connections between a sustained interest in science and students being able to cultivate relationships in their classrooms in the ways that feel important and caring to them. This theme of caring has been shown to be important for minority youth in schools, especially where standards and assessment are instead primarily emphasized ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref28">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref29">25</reflink>]). But this theme of community not only resonates strongly with students at SSC but also is aligned with common scientific practices. Scientists often work collaboratively and resolve problems together in contrast to how science is often taught in schools where students must complete assessments and solve problems individually ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref30">10</reflink>]).</p> <p>Responsibility was an important dimension of community. Sheniqua, the lively 6th grader who emphasized friendship and community in her description of democracy, emphasized the importance of dealing with "the bad kids" in a democratic classroom. She felt that these students should be "taken out" because they were detracting from other students' voices and their right to learn. An 11th grader, Natalie, said something similar: "Students in class who don't want to participate, who disrupt other students from doing their work, those people should be separated so we can be more successful and work together to be democratic." However, Tina, a 6th grader, offered an alternate view of how to deal with students "who are not being respectful." Instead of asking the teacher to remove students from her classroom, she believed that in a democratic context, students were to stand up for themselves. With regard to "bad students," she believed that students themselves should take on the responsibility of asking their peers to "calm down and respect the teacher because they are not letting their classmates learn." Tina's point once again indicates the importance of cultivating caring spaces for students in which they can learn and emphasizes how young people envision democratic classroom spaces as settings in which to stand out.</p> <p>Many of the students interviewed discussed how all students, along with the teacher, have a responsibility to help a classroom function well. But responsibility to these youth meant more than just behaving, although as Sheniqua points out, that is an important aspect of being responsible. Another aspect is being willing or even taking the risk, to share your voice or your strengths to help push the community along in a way that is productive to all members. But it is interesting to note that Sheniqua and Natalie are focused on protecting the voice of "good students," even if this means excluding certain participants of their "democracy" from the classroom. This student-generated pressure is important to note because it implies that classrooms are structured such that students are complicit in pushing certain youth to the periphery of science and that redressing some of these power structures requires changing the mindsets of students, not only the mindsets of the teachers.</p> <p>A third theme that emerged in students' definitions of democracy was the importance of being exceptional or of taking leadership. For example, Tina equated democracy with "stand[ing] up for oneself," while Alex described democracy as "making something of yourself." Daniel (in the 8th grade) felt that democracy was to "stand up for what you believe in." And students in other grades expressed similar ideas as well—democracy as "taking a leadership stand in what you do." Table 1 provides a list of elements of democratic pedagogy proposed by students and how they operationalize these ideas.</p> <p>TABLE 1 Student Models of Democratic Science Pedagogy</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Elements of Democratic Science Pedagogy</td><td>Elements Operationalized</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Freedom and Choice</td><td>– freedom of speech</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– a "say in what goes on around you"</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– "freedom to make things happen in the way you want"</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– choice in content, activities, design of classroom space, and forms of participation</td></tr><tr><td>Community and Caring</td><td>– opportunities to work collaboratively</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– classroom structures that promote caring and friendly interactions</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– protecting students' voices and their right to learn either through teacher intervention or by students emphasizing how certain behaviors can disrupt learning</td></tr><tr><td>Leadership</td><td>– standing up for what one believes in</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– making something of yourself</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– speaking to protect one's right to learn, responding to peers who might be disruptive</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0047926815-9">How Teachers Interpret the Idea of Democracy Science Pedagogy</hd> <p>In this section, I examine how the six teachers in this study defined the idea of democratic science pedagogy. The main themes that emerged, and that are discussed below, include: organization and structure, criticality, rigorous content, and choice.</p> <p>The first theme to describe democratic pedagogy is that of organization and structure. The teachers' positioning around this issue mirrors concerns about community that were articulated by students in their discussion of how to handle what they labeled "bad students" or in their concerns about students losing their right to learn. For example, Carey, the 11th grade teacher, used the term "clean and clear options" and "organized" in association with democracy. Hannah, the 8th grade teacher, talked about the idea of a "system" that is "structured." Maricia (a 10th grade teacher) explained her vision of democratic pedagogy as "organized chaos" with a teacher circulating among students and students helping each other and deciding together "what is next." Maleka's (a 6th grade teacher) depiction of democratic science pedagogy similarly shows a teacher working from "behind" students with students "sharing decisions with their peers" and engaging in discussion.</p> <p>These comments suggest that while one might have a lofty vision of voice and choice in developing a democratic classroom, it is essential to both teachers and students that exploration of democratic science pedagogy attend to issues of order and community relations. Without a discussion of these topics, teachers and students might turn their backs on the notion of a democratic classroom, despite its potential connections with learning and engagement.</p> <p>The second theme from the teachers' perspective is that democratic science pedagogy had a critical dimension. Several of the teachers associated this pedagogy with reframing power relations in the classroom. An important theme that emerged in how teachers viewed democratic classrooms was the notion of enhanced equality. Maricia described her view as "Equal participation and voice, equal say [in decision-making]." Jim commented that democracy was "equality within the voice of the people." Christine, who taught 9th grade, wrote that democracy "speaks to everyone having a voice about issues concerning them, not just the leader or the teacher." Hannah wrote that students, in this model, have authority and voice. They might "vote on the order of units, the type of final project, and what field trips to take." They "choose appropriate consequences from a list." Amore (a 7th grade life science teacher) spoke of drawing from students' funds of knowledge to shape classroom content: "The teacher can gain ideas and insight from students making the environment become a more group/team environment rather than teacher vs. student." Maleka defined democracy as, "When the voices of people control and dictate the roles individuals play in the community" and described students as "stakeholders." In fact, all but one teacher used the term "voice" explicitly in their definitions of democracy.</p> <p>The third theme to emerge from the teachers was that of rigorous content-based teaching, with a focus primarily on scientific knowledge and developing expertise. For example, Hannah, in Figure 1, shows that "learning goals" and "democratic technique" are at equal levels in contribu-ting to success.</p> <p>Graph: FIGURE 1 Learning goals and democratic influx contribute to success.</p> <p>Within Hannah's learning goals, she counted issues such as "science process skills" that include "experiment[ing] with their own questions/hypotheses." Multiple teachers connected democratic pedagogy with the assessments they needed to conduct; they suggested meeting with and asking students about what questions to include on quizzes. Maleka focused on the idea of expertise in associating democratic pedagogy with a "self-directed student project." The idea of self-direction is resonant with student comments about self-motivated learning and leadership in their classrooms. Maleka added, "When students have a say, they will be more engaged, and they will want to learn." Democratic science pedagogy for Jim was associated with attention to standards. It is clear that attention to science standards, content, nature of science skills, such as inquiry, and expertise are at the forefront of teachers' minds as they explore the idea of democratic science pedagogy.</p> <p>The fourth theme in how teachers envisioned democratic science pedagogy relates to the idea of choice. Maleka felt that students might contribute "relevant" ideas that she could not devise. Her comment ties to literature on incorporating students' funds of knowledge into curriculum development such that classroom material feels relevant to students ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref31">6</reflink>]). Amore associated students sharing their ideas with a feeling of empowerment, which suggests a link between funds of knowledge and shared authority (a "team environment" according to Carey, "the class being a group" according to Jim, "teacher and student working together" according to Christine) under the umbrella of democratic science pedagogy. Amore specified that she envisioned students having choice in "topics for research, projects for the science fair, extra credit activities, students teaching lessons, topics for electives, and sharing student work." In addition to cultivating students as sources of curricular input, the teachers had ideas about how to bring youth-centered experiences to their classrooms. Both Jim and Hannah discussed using videos of popular television shows as sources of real-world connections and projects. Underlying this theme of choice seems to be student agency in their own classrooms—students helping to determine science curricula, projects, and classroom structures that align with their own interests and goals.</p> <p>Table 2 lists elements of democratic pedagogy proposed by teachers and how they operationalized these ideas. This table has been included to provide concrete examples of how other teachers might approach the idea of democratic science pedagogy in their own classrooms.</p> <p>TABLE 2 Teacher Models of Democratic Science Pedagogy</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Elements of Democratic Science Pedagogy</td><td>Elements Operationalized</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Structure and Organization</td><td>Democratic pedagogy is:</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– organized chaos, a circulating teacher, students moving and helping one another</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– organization, a process, fair voting (i.e., a systematic approach to voice) (Carey)</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– a system that is structured</td></tr><tr><td>Criticality</td><td>– Classroom emphasis on equality, shared teacher-student authority and voice</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– Teacher shares curricular planning with students by letting them teach lessons</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– Students have a say in assessment</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– Students have a say in classroom management and systems</td></tr><tr><td /><td>– Students and teachers meet to discuss classroom issues</td></tr><tr><td>Focus on Content (Science Knowledge and Nature of Science), Assessment, and Developing Expertise</td><td><italic>Science knowledge</italic>:Attention to standard student-generated aims combined with teacher-generated aimsAttention to learning goals that combined with democratic techniques to result in student success<italic>Developing expertise and standing out</italic>:– Students work on self-directed projects on a theme they choose– Students "show off" what they have learned by presenting a project of their choice– Fostering more independence in learning<italic>Nature of science skills</italic>:– Students answer their own questions and investigate their own hypotheses with their own experiments, and they experience more hands-on work and inquiry– More inquiry learning, directed exploration, more labs—No right or wrong answers, esp. in lab<italic>Assessment</italic>:– Students shape assessment, create their own rubric or design the final unit project– Students generate quiz questions– Students influence homework format</td></tr><tr><td>Respect for Student Choice and Shared Authority, Resulting in Possibilities for Student Science Classroom Agency</td><td>Students:– can choose a topic and plan and teach a lesson; students are sometimes teachers.– run classroom management and systems as well as work structures such as group size– build connections between lessons and real-world and "home" examples; students are treated as more than empty vessels– have choices in elective topics and extra credit projects– answer questions using their own experiments– decide on projects, including the science fair– present weekly on a topic of their choosing– share ideas that are more creative and relevant than what teachers can come up with– ideas are not ridiculed but scaffolded– reflections and discussions have a role in shaping the direction of class– help choose and design field trips</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0047926815-10">Potential Outcomes of Democratic Science Pedagogy as Discussed and Demonstrated by Teachers a...</hd> <p>Standardized assessments and high-stakes outcomes are of major concern in the educational world and permeate the lives of teachers and students. How is democratic science pedagogy linked with student engagement and achievement? This is a question for a larger study, however, a few indicators have already emerged from this study.</p> <p>In the transcript below, a mixed grade group of students debate Candice's suggestion of having students design test questions as one example of a democratic intervention.</p> <p>Jhumki:    How do you think you could make your class more democratic or work with your teacher to do that?</p> <p>Candice:    Every other Friday have a quiz and have a refresher question on a topic of your choice.</p> <p>Jhumki:    Say a little more about that.</p> <p>Candice:    One question that sticks out to you from class, you should have a refresher question on that.</p> <p>Jhumki:    So the student gets to choose a question from class?</p> <p>Candice:    [Candice nods her head.] The teacher should get to approve the question.</p> <p>Jhumki:    What do the rest of you think of that idea? Do you agree with it? Do you disagree with it?</p> <p>Nicholas:    You said a test every week.</p> <p>UnidentifiedEvery other Friday.</p> <p>student:</p> <p>Kingston:    Every other Friday? Why that?</p> <p>Candice:    Because if it's every other Friday, students might have a lot to do, so they might not look over their notes every night, so it gives a chance to students who have other things to do.</p> <p>Kingston:    It should be every other week. I don't mind having it every week, it keeps me paying attention. If I had it every other week, it wouldn't keep me paying attention.</p> <p>Nicholas:    It shouldn't be a test but a pop quiz. Say it's Friday. There should be a pop quiz on Monday or Tuesday. That makes you study. Makes you study every night.</p> <p>This transcript suggests that students are invested in learning science. When they were asked about how they would change their science classrooms to be more democratic, they did not try to "get out" of assessments and tests or reduce their work load. Instead, they focused on what would make them pay attention and study the hardest. The students, in envisioning a democratic classroom, seem to desire the expertise and excellence embedded in the concept of critical science agency. Nicholas, for example, during a focus group, said that working in a democratic space would mean "to be challenged and use my brain." Monique in 12th grade wanted to have the opportunity to "be more focused on what's going on [in class]."</p> <p>Teachers associated democratic science pedagogy with learning and engagement. For example, Maricia felt that student choice is connected with learning: "When students have a choice, they are more willing to do their work, and their project usually comes out better." Amore echoed this theme when she wrote: "Students are more interested when they are stakeholders."</p> <hd id="AN0047926815-11">A RESEARCHER-STUDENT-TEACHER MODEL OF DEMOCRATIC SCIENCE PEDAGOGY</hd> <p>Asking teachers and students about how they envision and operationalize democratic science pedagogy has allowed us build a model of democratic science pedagogy. However, it is important to note that these findings are particular to the teachers and students involved in this study rather than generalizable claims to be made about all teachers and students. This study implies that each set of science educators that pursues democratic science pedagogy should consider existing models for this practice and then work with teachers and students to envision this pedagogy in the local school context, prior to designing interventions (see Figure 2).</p> <p>Graph: FIGURE 2 Researcher-student-teacher model of democratic science pedagogy.</p> <p>Based on student and teacher comments, the theme of "construction of community" has been included as a key element of this model. Students and teachers focus on community in different ways. On one hand, students talked about the need for a caring, friendly, peaceful community and the importance of protecting students' right to learn. Teachers discussed the need for organization, structure, and systems among the freedom and choice of a democratic approach.</p> <p>Shared authority continues to be an important part of democratic teaching. Students interpret this idea as freedom, honoring student voice (for example, through readings related to youth interests and culture) and having choice in field trips, classroom decorations, activities, readings, and lesson presentation style. Teachers articulated a desire to improve equity in their classrooms and to honor students' funds of knowledge by drawing on real-life and "home" examples and also emphasized student choice and voice in assessment, lesson planning, classroom management, field trips, and more.</p> <p>The example of Hannah's classroom presented at the beginning of this article reveals further that the themes of community and shared authority are important to her teaching. Perhaps more important is why these goals matter to her and to the teachers in this study. As discussed in the previous section, critical science agency continues to be a key theme in a model of democratic science pedagogy. In Hannah's classroom, as in the ideas presented by teachers and students in this study, students act as agents of change—shaping what happens, what is taught, and how teaching and learning occur. Students have authentic opportunities to engage science in ways that validated their voices and perspectives. In her class (as in the ideas expressed by both teachers and students in this study), a significant and formative factor in her classroom practice was that students assumed a more equitable standing with their teacher and had more voice in the curriculum and structures of their classrooms.</p> <p>School can be seen as preparation for real life, but what that means is that students are expected to conform to normative standards. Young people spend so much of their time in school, and this context shapes their intellectual and social lives. It seems only respectful of their time and experience to consider school an important space that they can shape in the ways they care about.</p> <p>Often, a deficit view is attached to urban, low-income students in science ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref32">4</reflink>]). However, the youth described above associated democracy with the idea of being exceptional. If these students believed that their science classrooms could be democratic spaces rather than spaces of disengagement and truncated discourse ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref33">3</reflink>]), their science classrooms might become a place to demonstrate motivation and excellence. In other words, if the discourse on how urban youth saw science classrooms were reframed such that it emphasized the importance of democracy, then science classrooms might become a setting in which they felt internally-motivated to pursue excellence because of their association of excellence and standing out with democracy. So, to have students aim for expertise and excellence rather than embracing traditional practices of constantly reminding students to improve their work or threatening them with punitive grade and behavioral measures, perhaps youth should be encouraged and supported in designing classroom practices and structures that mirror their vision of a democratic society.</p> <p>Finally, democratic science pedagogy has the potential to shape learning outcomes and science engagement; these possible impacts are worth exploring. Both teachers and students in this study either demonstrated or articulated enthusiasm for a science classroom reframed from a democratic context as holding the possibility of bringing out the best in students: motivation, a desire to learn, energy for being engaged in science content and classroom debate. Further, exploring the nature and impact of democratic science teaching has the potential to address issues of social justice in science education and science itself. Empowering teachers and students in traditionally marginalized urban schools to craft science instruction in ways that feel meaningful and relevant opens doors for students to engage in science and to redress power differentials in their lives.</p> <p> <bold>Sreyashi Jhumki Basu</bold> was an assistant professor in the Program in Science Education at the Department of Teaching and Learning, Steinhardt School, New York University. Initially trained in Human Biology at Stanford University, where she conducted research on the health and health practices of homeless youth in Moscow and St. Petersburg, Basu had taught high school science (physics, biology, earth science, physical science) as well as math (calculus and algebra) for six years in schools in California and New York. She was on the planning team for a new small school in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, a low-income, Caribbean neighborhood, where she was founding science teacher and assistant principal. At this school, she was proud of developing a ninth grade conceptual physics curriculum that paid particular attention to student voice and encouraged student activism situated in learning physics. While on the faculty at NYU, she conducted research on the role of democratic pedagogy in improving science education and on strategies to support the learning and engagement of students traditionally marginalized from university physics.</p> <p> <bold>Angela Calabrese Barton</bold> is a professor at Michigan State University in the College of Education. Her research focuses on issues of equity and social justice in urban centers, with primary attention on understanding the learning experiences of low-income youth. Drawing primarily from feminist and sociocultural theories, she is deeply committed to researching with teachers and youth to build equitable and place-based learning environments and opportunities to gain access to and learn science in ways that support who youth are and want to be.</p> <hd id="AN0047926815-12">Acknowledgments</hd> <p>This article was originally submitted by S. Jhumki Basu who passed away in December 2008. Angela Calabrese Barton, a colleague and friend, had collaborated in the past with Dr. Basu and offered to complete the revisions of the manuscript in preparation for its posthumous publication.</p> <hd id="AN0047926815-13">Notes</hd> <ref id="AN0047926815-14"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref20" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> 1. We understand expertise as students as such: performing well on assignments, speaking articulately and in detail about science topics, asking content-related questions, performing well on external subject-specific assessments, and exploring science topics beyond class expectations.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref24" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> 2. We consider engagement as: students answering and asking topical questions, writing thoughtful responses to class and homework assignments, conveying active participation through words and body language, expressing positive interest in attending science class and in pursuing further education and careers in science, and asking teachers for help and additional work.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0047926815-15"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibtext> Basu, S.J.2008. How students design and enact physics lessons: Five immigrant Caribbean youth and the cultivation of student voice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8): 881–899.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Basu, S.J. and Calabrese Barton, A.2007. Developing a sustained interest in science among urban minority youth. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(3): 466–489.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref8" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Brown, B.2006. "It isn't no slang that can be said about this stuff": Language, identity, and appropriating science discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(1): 96–126.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref32" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Buxton, C.2006. Creating contextually authentic science in a "low-performing" urban elementary school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(7): 695–721.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref9" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Calabrese Barton, A.2001. Teaching science for social justice. New York: Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref17" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Calabrese Barton, A.1998. Margin and center: Intersections of homeless children, science education, and a pedagogy of liberation. Theory into Practice, 37(4): 296–305.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref13" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Calabrese Barton, A. and Tan, E.2009. Funds of knowledge, discourses and hybrid space. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1): 50–73.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Foucault, M.1982. The subject and power. Critical Inquiry, 8(4): 777–795.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref15" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Gilbert, A. and Yerrick, R.2001. Same school, separate worlds: A sociocultural study of identity, resistance, and negotiation in a rural, lower track science classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38: 574–598.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hogan, K. and Corey. 2001. Viewing classrooms as cultural contexts for fostering scientific literacy. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 32(2): 214–244.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lane, J.E. and Ersson, S.2003. Democracy: A comparative approach, New York: Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moll, L.C., Amanti, C., Neff, D. and Gonzalez, N.1992. Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31(2): 132–141.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moreno-Lopez, I.2005. Sharing power with students: The critical language classroom. Radical Pedagogy, 7(2)[Online] <ulink href="http://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/content/issue7%5f2/">http://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/content/issue7%5f2/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mulvey, P. and Nicholson, S.2003. Enrollment and degree report, College Park, MD: American Institute of Physics.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Science Board (U.S.). 2000. Science and engineering indicators—2000, Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics. 2007. Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2007, NSF 07-315Arlington, VARetrieved October 18, 2009, from <ulink href="http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd">http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Noddings, N.1992. The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education, New York: Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Parsons, E.2005. From caring as a relation to culturally relevant caring: A white teacher's bridge to black students. Equity & Excellence in Education, 38(1): 25–34.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rawls, J.2005. A theory of justice, Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. [Original work published 1971.]</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Satz, D.2007. Equality, adequacy, and education for citizenship. Ethics, 117(4): 623–648.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Seiler, G.2001. Reversing the "standard" direction: Science emerging from the lives of African American students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(9): 1000–1014.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Strauss, A. and Corbin, J.1998. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tan, E. and Calabrese Barton, A.2008. From peripheral to central, the story of Melanie's metamorphosis in an urban middle school science class. Science Education, 92(4): 567–590.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Turner, E. and Font, B.Paper presented at the American Education Studies Association Conference. Mexico City. Fostering critical mathematical agency: Urban middle school students engage in mathematics to understand, critique and act upon their world,</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Valenzuela, A.1999. Subtractive schooling: U.S.-Mexican youth and the politics of caring, Albany: State University of New York Press.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By S.Jhumki Basu and AngelaCalabrese Barton</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref30"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ879309
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: A Researcher-Student-Teacher Model for Democratic Science Pedagogy: Connections to Community, Shared Authority, and Critical Science Agency
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Basu%2C+S%2E+Jhumki%22">Basu, S. Jhumki</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Equity+%26+Excellence+in+Education%22"><i>Equity & Excellence in Education</i></searchLink>. 2010 43(1):72-87.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 16
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2010
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Justice%22">Social Justice</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Practices%22">Educational Practices</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Democratic+Values%22">Democratic Values</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Science+Instruction%22">Science Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Models%22">Models</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interviews%22">Interviews</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Observation%22">Observation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Power+Structure%22">Power Structure</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Immigrants%22">Immigrants</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Secondary+School+Students%22">Secondary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Secondary+School+Teachers%22">Secondary School Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Attitudes%22">Teacher Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Attitudes%22">Student Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Urban+Schools%22">Urban Schools</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/10665680903489379
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1066-5684
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This article presents a model for democratic pedagogy in science classrooms that is based on an examination of existing literature on democratic educational practices and on teacher and student ideas about how this pedagogy can take shape and be operationalized in science classrooms. A goal of democratic science pedagogy is to explore ways of teaching science for social justice among diverse school populations by drawing on the ideas and assets of students and teachers. Drawing upon interview and observational data, the model shows democratic science pedagogy as centered in constructions of community, shared authority, and critical science agency--students relying on subject-matter knowledge to make change and to redress power differentials in their lives. (Contains 2 tables, 2 figures, and 2 notes. This article was written with Angela Calabrese Barton.)
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 25
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2010
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ879309
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ879309
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/10665680903489379
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
        StartPage: 72
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Social Justice
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Practices
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Democratic Values
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Science Instruction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Models
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interviews
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Observation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Power Structure
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Immigrants
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Secondary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Secondary School Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Urban Schools
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: A Researcher-Student-Teacher Model for Democratic Science Pedagogy: Connections to Community, Shared Authority, and Critical Science Agency
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Basu, S. Jhumki
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2010
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1066-5684
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 43
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Equity & Excellence in Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1