Power in Teaching and Learning Processes in the Physics Classroom

Author(s):

Malena Lidar(presenting / submitting)Anna T. Danielsson Maria Berge

Conference:

ECER 2016

Network:

27. Didactics - Learning and Teaching

Format:

Paper

Session Information

27 SES 05 B, Power Relations and Student's Contributions in Teaching and Learning

Paper/Poster Session

Time:

2016-08-24

13:30-15:00

Room:

NM-F103

Chair:

Florence Ligozat

Contribution

In this paper we want to contribute to the scholarship of issues of how power operates in science classrooms, by investigating what actions are made possible and desirable in interaction in terms of the construction of disciplinary-specific knowledge, values and norms. The cases under investigation in the paper come from the practice of physics education, with the aim to explore the simultaneous constitution of knowledge and power in physics classrooms.

An investigation of power relations in the context of physics teaching is motivated by the difficulty to interest youth, (particularly women) in science education, as well as by the increasing demand for science graduates in OECD countries (OECD 2008). We argue that investigations of how power and knowledge interrelate in classroom interactions may contribute to the understanding of how to patterns of exclusion in physics come about in the classroom context.

In studies of science education much focus has been placed on socialisation processes, in particular in terms of which students are more easily socialised into the knowledge, norms and values of the disciplines and which students that are struggling and/or left outside (Archer, DeWitt, & Willis, 2014; Brickhouse & Potter, 2001; Carlone, 2004; Jobér, 2012). To at least some degree, such research has generally conceptualized power (implicitly or explicitly) as structural, focusing on how different axes of power intersect with people’s identity constitutions. However, a Foucauldian conceptualization of power allows for a shift of focus to how power is manifested in people’s actions rather than mirrored in them.

In this paper, power is conceptualized as something that is acted out in practices of people’s actions and communications in everyday life. Foucault (1982/02) characterises power relations as 'action upon the actions of others'. Power is thus regarded as something that guides or governs the actions of others and can be expressed as a form of governance. By governance we mean the acts people perform in interaction with other people in order to change or maintain certain patterns of acting (cf. Rose 1999, Öhman 2010). In the case of the physics classroom, a systematic use of language and actions by teachers as well as students direct what should be highlighted and discerned in terms of physics knowledge and knowledge-making, which we consider as an aspect of power. In this way power and knowledge are integral to teaching and learning processes and what we will explore is the simultaneous constitution of knowledge and power in the teaching of physics. When someone participates in teaching and learning activities, they learn much more than the content knowledge being taught. Along with learning about what counts as relevant knowledge in (e.g.) physics, they also learn about the norms and values of physics, and who can be a physicist (Roberts & Östman, 1998). Roberts and Östman (1998) express this as that any learning situation will also involve socialisation. Roberts and Östman coined the notion of ‘companion meanings’ to denote the extras that follow the learning of content knowledge, that is, what is valued and appreciated in science practice and what is not. ‘Companion meanings’ thus function as constructing and re-constructing norms of what science is and for whom, thereby giving an analytical entry-point to a simultaneous consideration of subject knowledge and norms.

The purpose of the paper is to investigate how students encounter practices in the physics classroom. This includes, for example, how what counts as important knowledge and valid activities in physics, and who can partake in these activities, are communicated in classroom practice.

Method

The empirical data consists of video recordings and field notes from three lower secondary schools in Y8 and Y9 respectively (13-15 year old students). One inner-city high performing school, one rural school with less academic traditions, and one immigrant dense suburb school was selected, and between six and eleven physics lessons in each school has been recorded. The research design is made in order to enable comparisons between different physics activities and classrooms. The comparative approach makes it possible to identify differences and/or similarities in terms of how governance is acted out and which companion meanings are offered in the interplay. The analytical model is built on the transactional approach suggested by Östman, Öhman, Lundqvist and Lidar (2015), founded in the view that meaning in a situation is constituted in interplay between the participants in the situation. The approach is operationalized in a three analytical stages. The first stage consisted of investigations of the meaning making in the teaching process through analysis of ‘epistemological moves’ (Lidar et al. 2006). Epistemological moves are what the teacher says that gives the students information about what counts as relevant knowledge and relevant ways to get knowledge in a specific practice. Epistemological moves can be for example generative moves (to enable the students to generate explanations) or re-orienting moves (to points out that there can be other properties worth investigating). In the second stage, analyses of governance and self-governance (cf. Öhman 2010) are used. Governance is regarded as actions that have a guiding function (Öhman 2010), thus focus is on how the actions of one, or several, people contribute to that other people’s actions in some way is reoriented, corrected or intensified in a certain direction. In this step, we identify which actions become desirable or undesirable in the teaching process. The analysis also considers how governance is integrated in the epistemological moves made by teachers and thereby connected to the subject content. In the third stage we consider potential companion meanings of the meaning making and governance in the proceeding stages. This includes comparisons of what actions that are made relevant and what forms of governance that is used with other possible actions and governance forms.

Expected Outcomes

At first glance, teachers from all three schools adhere closely to a traditional interpretation of a physics curriculum, with a strong focus on factual knowledge and a distinct progression through this curriculum. However, a more detail analysis revealed that, for example: In school 1 the students were invited to contribute to the progression of the lessons by generative moves guiding them to ‘fill in’ certain content, not previously presented by the teacher. In school 2 the epistemological moves were more instructive and directed the students’ contributions to showing that they have been keeping up with what the teacher has previously presented. Also in school 3 generative moves are used, but in this classroom the teachers actions made the students’ own experiences relevant to explain the physics. Consequently, while the differencing approaches might not include different physics content, an analysis of the companion meanings made consequences for potential student participation explicit. Therefore, in the increasingly individualised late liberal society where people are expected to be active, reflective and make choices for their own personal good, the students in these classrooms are given very different pre-requisites for informed citizenship. Thus, how the discipline-specific norms are enacted in the classroom can offer the students specific views of the world, themselves and other people. In conclusion, this way of analyzing practice opens up for a practical critique which enables us to consider conceivable implications of different teaching practices, and to consider what are possible, relevant or desirable actions in a teaching practice.

References

Archer, L., DeWitt, J., & Willis, B. (2014). Adolescent boys' science aspirations: Masculinity, capital, and power. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 1-30. doi: 10.1002/tea.21122 Brickhouse, N. W., & Potter, J. T. (2001). Young Women's Scientific Identity Formation in an Urban Context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 965-980. Carlone, H. B. (2004). The cultural production of science in reform-based physics: girls' access, participation, and resistance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 392-414. Jobér, A. (2012). Social Class in Science Class. Malmö: Malmö University. Foucault, M. (1982/2002). The subject and power. In J. D. Faubion (ed). Essential works of Foucault 1954-1984, volume 3, Power. 326-348. London: Penguin Books. Lidar, M., Lundqvist, E. & Östman, L. (2006). Teaching and learning in the science classroom. The interplay between teachers’ epistemological moves and students’ practical epistemology. Science Education, 90(1), 148-163. OECD 2008. Encouraging student interest in science and technology studies. ISBN: 978-92-64-04069-4 Öhman, M. (2010). Analysing the direction of socialisation from a power perspective. Sport, Education and Society, 15(4), 393-409. doi: 10.1080/13573322.2010.514735 Östman, L, Öhman, M, Lundqvist, E & Lidar, M (2015). Teaching, Learning and Governance in Science Education and Physical Education: A comparative approach. Interchange. XXXX-XXXX Roberts, D. A., & Östman, L. (Eds.). (1998). Problems of meanings in science curriculum. New York: Teachers College Press. Rose, Nikolas (1999). Powers of Freedom. Reframing political thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the Mind: a sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Author Information

Malena Lidar (presenting / submitting)

Uppsala university, Sweden

Anna T. Danielsson

Uppsala university, Sweden

Maria Berge

Umeå university, Sweden

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.