: Speaking Scientifically – Part 2 Using dialogue and collaborative learning to support the teaching of science concepts and facts

Katherine Branco is the Director of the North London Alliance Research School and in this blog she considers how creating opportunities for dialogue and collaborative learning can support the teaching of primary science. 

As is the case across the primary curriculum, building in opportunities for dialogue and for pupils to verbally explain their thinking, is vital to science learning. Communication between teachers and pupils can take many forms; ranging from interactions that elicit brief responses, to ones that produce more extended reflection and discussion. ​‘Dialogic talk’ refers to a particularly effective type of talk that helps move the learning on. Neil Mercer (2003), explains that dialogic talk is that in which ​‘teachers and pupils make substantial and significant contributions and through which pupils’ thinking on a given idea or theme is helped to move forward.’(ibid: 74)

This leads us to recommendation 2 of the Primary Science Report which is to…

Encourage pupils to explain their thinking, whether verbally or in written form.

It is recommended that this is done by:

1. Creating a collaborative environment
2. Capitalising on the power of dialogue
3. Cultivating reasoning and justification

Scientific concepts can prove quite difficult and at times abstract for primary children to understand straight away. It is not unusual for misconceptions to arise. Both pre-empting common misconceptions or addressing them in the way of group feedback are important strategies to advance learning. Applying recommendation 2 in instances like this will go a long way. For the benefit of illustration, let’s pick up the Year 6​‘Animals Including Humans’ science unit again that was referenced in ​‘Part 1’.

It’s the start of the unit. The children have been taught the definitions of the parts of the circulatory system. From teaching this unit before, the teacher knows that children are normally unclear about the heart’s definition.To prepare for this, the teacher shares a concept cartoon and assigns different views to person A, B and C:

The children, in trios, are then given scaffolds to help justify their thinking – instigating, building or challenging their peers. This concept cartoon activity was developed using Voice 21resources.

Instigator (person who goes first)

​“I think that A is true because the heart has to work hard to let the blood out and then let it back in.” (The use of ​‘because’ reinforces the need for a justification)

Challenger (person who goes second)

​“I disagree and think B is correct instead. I think this because the heart is a collection of tissues that is used for the job of pumping blood to all of the parts of the body.“

Builder (person who can go second or third, depending on the direction of the discussion)

​“I think C is correct which means that both A and B are also, in a way, true. The heart is a muscular organ that is made up of muscular tissue and it also performs the job of pumping blood to all of the parts of the body.”

Through the concept cartoon activity the children are able to contextualise the vocabulary previously taught by rehearsing it with their peers. In doing so, they are also able to address misconceptions they may have in order to understand what the heart is.

In your science lessons, planning opportunities to ​‘speak scientifically’ through implementing recommendation 1 and 2 of the guidance report will improve your pupils’ scientific understanding, whilst also improving their language competence in the long run.

Further Listening and Reading

​‘Evidence into Action EEF Podcast: High Quality Talk’. This podcast includes Neil Mercer, who gives a great background to oracy and its role.

Oracy Cambridge – blog series. Oracy Cambridge have a range of blogs that go some way to help teachers understand what oracy is and what it isn’t.

References

Mercer, N. (2003). The educational value of dialogic talk in whole class dialogue. New perspectives on spoken English in the classroom: discussion papers, 73 – 76.