SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • English 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Login
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • About SSOAR
  • Guidelines
  • Publishing in SSOAR
  • Cooperating with SSOAR
    • Cooperation models
    • Delivery routes and formats
    • Projects
  • Cooperation partners
    • Information about cooperation partners
  • Information
    • Possibilities of taking the Green Road
    • Grant of Licences
    • Download additional information
  • Operational concept
Browse and search Add new document OAI-PMH interface
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Download full text

(536.6Kb)

Citation Suggestion

Please use the following Persistent Identifier (PID) to cite this document:
https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-210206

Exports for your reference manager

Bibtex export
Endnote export

Display Statistics
Share
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

Talking science: the research evidence on the use of small-group discussions in science teaching

[journal article]

Bennett, Judith
Hogarth, Sylvia
Lubben, Fred
Campbell, Bob
Robinson, Alison

Abstract

This paper reports the findings of two systematic reviews of the use and effects of small-group discussions in high school science teaching. 94 studies were included in an overview (systematic map) of work in the area, and 24 studies formed the basis of the in-depth reviews. The reviews indicate tha... view more

This paper reports the findings of two systematic reviews of the use and effects of small-group discussions in high school science teaching. 94 studies were included in an overview (systematic map) of work in the area, and 24 studies formed the basis of the in-depth reviews. The reviews indicate that there is considerable diversity in the topics used to promote small-group discussions. They also demonstrate that students often struggle to formulate and express coherent arguments, and demonstrate a low level of engagement with tasks. The reviews suggest that groups function more purposefully, and understanding improves most, when specifically constituted such that differing views are represented, when some form of training is provided for students on effective group work, and when help in structuring discussions is provided in the form of 'cues'. Single sex groups function more purposefully than mixed sex groups, though improvements in understanding are independent of gender composition of groups. Finally, the reviews demonstrate very clearly that, for small-group discussions to be effective, teachers and students need to be given explicit teaching in the skills associated with the development of arguments and the characteristics associated with effective group discussions. In addition to the substantive findings, the paper also reports on key features of the methods employed to gather and analyse data. Of particular note are the two contrasting approaches to data analysis, one adopting a grounded theory approach and the other drawing on established methods of discourse analysis.... view less

Classification
Curriculum, Teaching, Didactics

Free Keywords
learning activities; literature review; small group discussion

Document language
English

Publication Year
2009

Page/Pages
p. 69-95

Journal
International Journal of Science Education, 32 (2009) 1

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802713507

Status
Postprint; peer reviewed

Licence
PEER Licence Agreement (applicable only to documents from PEER project)


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.