SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik) / 2013 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2

DEQUAL: A Tool for Investigating Deliberative Qualities in Students’ Socioscientific Conversations

Johan ÖHMAN
Barbro GUSTAFSSON
Pages
319–338
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

By pointing out characteristics, strengths and weaknesses of students’ group-conversations, this methodological proposal can provide further guidance for an integrative understanding of the teacher’s assignment in science education

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:School is assumed to equip students with subject knowledge and contribute to their development as human beings and democratic citizens as well.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this article, the democratic dimension of the teaching assignment is brought to the fore, and an analysis tool for investigating students’ conversations on socioscientific issues that emphasises democratic aspects is presented.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:By pointing out characteristics, strengths and weaknesses of students’ group-conversations, this methodological proposal can provide further guidance for an integrative understanding of the teacher’s assignment in science education
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

School is assumed to equip students with subject knowledge and contribute to their development as human beings and democratic citizens as well. In this article, the democratic dimension of the teaching assignment is brought to the fore, and an analysis tool for investigating students’ conversations on socioscientific issues that emphasises democratic aspects is presented. The DEQUAL-tool, where the acronyms stand for DEliberative QUALities, comprises both the content-related and formal aspects of the conversations, with a specific emphasis on the collective expressions of democratic qualities like questioning, consideration for others and conveying different dimensions and arguments. DEQUAL is based on an intersubjective and communicative understanding of democracy and meaning-making, and is theoretically inspired by John Dewey’s and Jürgen Habermas’ views on these matters. The development and function of DEQUAL is clarified using excerpts from upper secondary school students talking about how living in a certain place influences the greenhouse effect. By pointing out characteristics, strengths and weaknesses of students’ group-conversations, this methodological proposal can provide further guidance for an integrative understanding of the teacher’s assignment in science education

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖHMAN, J., GUSTAFSSON, B. (2022). DEQUAL: A Tool for Investigating Deliberative Qualities in Students’ Socioscientific Conversations. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik), Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2, 319–338. https://ajindex.com/articles/540778

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (7)

  1. Alexander, T. M. (1994). Educating the democratic heart: Pluralism, traditions and the humanities. Studies in Philosophy Education, 13(3—4), 243—260. Bailin, S. (2002). Critical thinking and science education. Science Education, (4), 361—375. Berkowitz, M. W., Simmons, P. (2003). Integrating science education and character education. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 17—1 8). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
  2. Biesta, G. J. J., Burbules, N. C. (2003). Pragmatism and educational research. Lanham, MD: Rowman Littlefield. Biesta, G. J. J. (1994). Education as practical intersubjectivity: Towards critical— pragmatic understanding of education. Educational Theory, 44(3), 299—3 18. Bingle, W. H., Gaskell, P. J. (1994). Scientific literacy for decisionmaking and the social construction. Science Education, 78(2), 185—202. Bravo, B. Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2011). learning progression for using evidence in argumentation: an initial framework. Presentation on the European Science Education Research Association conference, September 5th—9th 2011,
  3. Lyon, France. Carleheden, M. (2006). Towards democratic foundations: Habermasian perspective on the politics of education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(5), 521—544. Dewey, J. (1916/1999). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Free Press.
  4. Dewey, J. (1922/2007). Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology. New York: Holt. Dewey, J. (1927/1988). The public and its problems. In J.-A. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey. The later works 1925—1953. Volume 2. (pp. 235—372). Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press.
  5. Dewey, J. (1929/1958). Experience and nature. New York: Dover. Dewey, J. (1938/1998). Experience and education (60th anniversary ed.). West Lafayette, Ind.: Kappa Delta Pi. Dewey, J., Childs, J. L. (1933/1986). The underlying philosophy of education. In J.— A. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey. The later works 1925—1953. Volume 8. (pp. 77—103). Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press.
  6. Ekborg, M. (2005). Is heat generated from crematorium an appropriate source for district heating? Student teachers, reasoning about complex environmental issue. Environmental Education Research, (5), 557—574. Englund, T. (2000). Rethinking democracy and education: Towards an education of deliberative citizens. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(2), 305-313.
  7. Englund, T. (200