University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 12-2015 "Socratic Circles are a Luxury": Exploring the Conceptualization of a Dialogic Tool in Three Science Classrooms Michelle Renee Copelin University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Science and Mathematics Education Commons, and the Secondary Education and Teaching Commons Recommended Citation Copelin, Michelle Renee, ""Socratic Circles are a Luxury": Exploring the Conceptualization of a Dialogic Tool in Three Science Classrooms" (2015). Theses and Dissertations. 1441. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1441 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. “Socratic Circles are a Luxury”: Exploring the Conceptualization of a Dialogic Tool in Three Science Classrooms A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Curriculum and Instruction by Michelle Renee Copelin University of Arkansas Bachelor of Science in Secondary Education, 1986 University of Arkansas Master of Education in Educational Technology, 1987 December 2015 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. _____________________________________ Dr. Christian Goering Dissertation Director _____________________________________ Dr. Michael Wavering Committee Member _____________________________________ Dr. Marcia Imbeau Committee Member Copyright © Michelle Copelin 2015 Abstract Research has shown that dialogic instruction promotes learning in students. Secondary science has traditionally been taught from an authoritative stance, reinforced in recent years by testing policies requiring coverage. Socratic Circles are a framework for student-led dialogic discourse, which have been successfully used in English language arts and social studies classrooms. The purpose of this research was to explore the implementation process of Socratic Circles in secondary science classes where they have been perceived to be more difficult. Focusing on two physical science classes and one chemistry class, this study described the nature and characteristics of Socratic Circles, teachers’ dispositions toward dialogic instruction, the nature and characteristics of student discussion, and student motivation. Socratic Circles were found to be a dialogic support that influenced classroom climate, social skills, content connections, and student participation. Teachers felt a conflict between using traditional test driven scripted teaching, and exploring innovation through dialogic instruction. Students experienced opportunities for peer interaction, participation, and deeper discussions, in a framework designed to improve dialogic skills. Students in two of the classrooms showed evidence of motivation for engaging in peer-led discussion, and students in one class did not. The class that did not show evidence of motivation had not been given the same scaffolding as the other two classes. Two physical science teachers and one chemistry teacher found that Socratic Circles required more scaffolding than was indicated by their peers in other disciplines such as English and social studies. The teachers felt that student’s general lack of background knowledge for any given topic in physical science or chemistry necessitated the building of a knowledge platform before work on a discussion could begin. All three of the teachers indicated that Socratic Circles were a rewarding activity, beneficial to students, which they would use in the future. Acknowledgements I wish to express sincere gratitude to my committee for the encouragement and guidance they provided during this long process. I appreciate the input from Dr. Marcia Imbeau who continues to be an exemplar of strength and excellence, and Dr. Michael Wavering who shared his depth of scholarship and insight in science pedagogy, and his time in editing and proofreading. I have been privileged to receive leadership and direction from the two of them for many years. A special thank you goes to Dr. Christian Goering who maintained a steady bearing and always had an encouraging word. It has been an honor to work with such an innovative leader in education. I thank them all for the time and energy they devoted as educators in general and to me in particular. It was especially kind of Matt Copeland, author of Socratic Circles: Fostering Critical and Creative thinking in Middle and High School, to provide feedback for this study. I appreciate the time and effort he spent providing detailed critique and suggestions. The framework he developed through Socratic Circles has benefitted countless students and teachers in the effort to engage in dialogic discourse. I want to thank my family for all their assistance. Thank you to my mother Linda Kay Bond for her unfailing support; for taking up the slack in practical matters, and for always providing a listening ear. Thank you to my husband Bill Copelin, for being patient as our lives have been put on “hold.” And a special thank you to my son Ben Copelin, for being my number one source of encouragement. Table of Contents CHAPTER I 1 INTRODUCTION 1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 2 BACKGROUND OF STUDY 3 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY 7 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 7 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 8 SCOPE OF STUDY 8 METHODOLOGY 8 DEFINITION OF TERMS 9 SUMMARY 10 CHAPTER II 12 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 12 DIALOGIC INSTRUCTION 12 DISCIPLINARY LITERACY 23 CLASSROOM CLIMATE 27 TEACHER DISPOSITIONS 32 STUDENT MOTIVATION 36 SOCRATIC TECHNIQUES 42 EMPIRICAL RESEARCH 45 GAP IN LITERATURE 59 CHAPTER III 61 METHODOLOGY 61 RESEARCHER ’S POSITIONALITY - BRIDLING 62 RESEARCH DESIGN 65 OVERVIEW OF PROCEDURES 65 RATIONALE 66 DEMOGRAPHICS 67 POPULATION AND SAMPLE 67 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES 68 DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES 71 LIMITATIONS OF THE METHODS 73 RISKS AND BENEFITS 74 SUMMARY 74 CHAPTER IV 75 DATA ANALYSIS 75 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 75 OVERVIEW OF DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES 76 OVERVIEW OF DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES 76 DATA SOURCE 77 DATA ANALYSIS PROCESS 81 RESULTS 84 CHARACTERISTICS AND NATURE OF SOCRATIC CIRCLES 85 SUMMARY 120 ANALYSIS OF DISPOSITIONS OF PARTICIPANT TEACHERS 121 SUMMARY 155 ANALYSIS OF STUDENT DISCUSSION 156 SUMMARY 170 STUDENT MOTIVATION 170 SUMMARY 186 CHAPTER V 187 DISCUSSION 187 SUMMARY 187 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 187 DIALOGIC SUPPORT 188 DIALOGIC VERSUS AUTHORITATIVE TEACHING STRATEGIES 199 DIALOGIC SKILL 205 STUDENT MOTIVATION 209 STRENGTHS 213 LIMITATIONS 213 DELIMITATIONS 215 IMPLICATIONS 215 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 220 CONCLUSION 221 REFERENCES 224 APPENDIX A 232 APPENDIX B 233 APPENDIX C 234 APPENDIX D 235 APPENDIX E 237 APPENDIX F 238 CHAPTER I Introduction Years of broad shallow curriculum have created an atmosphere where authoritative monologic instruction and rote memorization techniques flourished in the science classroom. Teachers faithfully edited and refined monologues seeking the fastest and most efficient method to transmit vast amounts of knowledge often becoming the “sage on the stage” in the process (King, 1993, p. 30). Students cast in the role of passive receiver learned to process seemingly limitless amounts of information in working memory before regurgitating it on the next test. In an effort to realign educational focus, educators are now reexamining dialogic instruction as a means to facilitate deeper understanding. This chapter focuses on the implementation of Socratic Circles (Copeland, 2005) as one method of dialogic instruction in the science classroom. The problem and purpose for this study will be reviewed as well as the significance and methodology. Socratic discussions work well in humanities classes where many questions lend themselves to multiple points of view. As students in these classrooms engage in dialogic talk they develop the complex thinking needed for argument writing and the reading of complex texts required by 21 st -century literacies such as the Common Core (Juzwik, Borsheim-Black, Caughlan, & Heintz, 2013). Science classrooms differ from humanities classrooms in that most of the basic concepts in science, especially physical science, are traditionally taught from an authoritative point of view (Mortimer & Scott, 2003). Science teachers generally feel this is the most effective way to transmit content information. However, students in science classrooms are now being invited to Join academic conversations of meaning making through “what are increasingly being called disciplinary literacies” (Juzwik, et al., 2013, p. 78) . Socratic Circles 1 can be used to facilitate deeper understandings of scientific concepts and controversies, and as a preparation for argumentative writing as students practice the skills of speaking and listening. Statement of the Problem Dialogic instruction based on normal patterns of discussion has been shown to have strong associations with student achievement (Nystrand, Wu, Gamoran, Zeiser, & Long, 2001). Studies on student learning have shown engaging classroom discussions to be a positive factor (Murphy, Wilkinson, Soter, Hennessy, & Alexander, 2009). This type of teaching is also known to increase student motivation (Adler, 1982; Strong, 1996). Socratic discussions have been shown to be a constructive dialogical tool in English language arts and social studies classes