Interactive dynamics of imagination in a science classroom
Main Article Content
Abstract
In this paper, we introduce a conceptual framework for researching the dynamics of imagination in science classroom interactions. While educational interest in imagination has recently increased, prior research has not adequately accounted for how imagination is realized in and through classroom interactions, nor has it created a framework for its empirical investigation. Drawing on a theory of imagination situated in cultural psychology (Zittoun et al., 2013; Zittoun & Gillespie, 2016), we propose such a framework. We illustrate our framework with a telling case (Mitchell, 1984) of imagination from a Finnish primary science classroom community. Our illustration focuses on the dynamics of imagination as it unfolds in classroom interactions and how qualitatively distinct loops of imagination are formed. In specific, we show how the students’ meaning making expands in time and space and can become more refined and differentiated through loops of imagination and their dynamics. In all, our paper argues that imagination is a constitutive element of science learning. Our proposed conceptual framework provides potential avenues for further empirical research on the dynamics of imagination in science learning and teaching.
Article Details
FLR adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs Creative Common License (BY-NC-ND). That is, Copyright for articles published in this journal is retained by the authors with, however, first publication rights granted to the journal. By virtue of their appearance in this open access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings.
References
Connery, M. C., John-Steiner, V., & Marjanovic-Shane, A. (2010). Vygotsky and creativity: A cultural-historical approach to play, meaning making, and the arts. New York: Peter Lang.
Damsa, C., & Jornet, A. (this issue). Revisiting learning in higher education—Framing notions redefined through an ecological perspective. Frontline Learning Research.
Dawes, L., Mercer, N., & Wegerif, R. (2000). Thinking together: A programme of activities for developing thinking skills at KS2. UK: Questions.
Fleer, M. (2015). Imagination and its contributions to learning in science. In M. Fleer & N. Pramling (Eds.) A Cultural-Historical Study of Children Learning Science (pp. 39-57). Netherlands: Springer.
Glăveanu, V., Gillespie, A., & Valsiner, J. (2015). (Eds.) Rethinking Creativity: Contributions from Social and Cultural Psychology. London: Routledge.
Kamberelis, G., & Wehunt, M. D. (2012). Hybrid discourse practice and science learning. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7(3), 505-534. doi:10.1007/s11422-012-9395-1
Kumpulainen, K., Vasama, S., & Kangassalo, M. (2003). The intertextuality of children's explanations in a technology-enriched early years science classroom. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(8), 793-805.doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2004.11.002
Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39–103.doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0401_2
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Law, J. (1998). After meta-narrative: On knowing in tension. In R. Chia, In the Realm of Organisation: Essays for Robert Cooper (pp. 90–111). London: Routledge.
Linell, P. (1998). Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
McMillan, M. (1904). Education through the imagination. London, S. Sonnenschein & Co., Lim.
Mitchell, C. J. (1984). Typicality and the case study. In R.F. Ellens (Ed.), Ethnographic research: A guide to general conduct (pp. 238–241). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Nemirovsky, R., Rasmussen, C., Sweeney, G., & Wawro, M. (2012). When the classroom floor becomes the complex plane: Addition and multiplication as ways of bodily navigation. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 287-323.doi: 0.1080/10508406.2011.611445
Pelaprat, E., & Cole, M. (2011). “Minding the Gap”: Imagination, Creativity and Human Cognition. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 45(4), 397-418.doi: doi:10.1007/s12124-011-9176-5
Rajala, A. (2016). Toward an agency-centered pedagogy: A teacher's journey of expanding the context of school learning. (Doctoral dissertation) University of Helsinki.
Van Eijck, M., & Roth, W. M. (2013). Imagination of science in education: From epics to novelization (Vol. 7). New York: Springer.
Varelas, M., & Pappas, C. C. (2006). Intertextuality in read-alouds of integrated science-literacy units in urban primary classrooms: Opportunities for the development of thought and language. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 211-259.doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci2402_2
Vygotsky, L. S. (1931). Pedologija podrostka. Moscow-Leningrad: Uchebno-Pedagogicheskoe Izdatel’stvo. (Title in English: Paedology of the Adolescent).
Vygotsky, L. S. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 42(1), 7-97.
Warren, B., Ballenger, C., Ogonowski, M., Rosebery, A. & Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2001). Rethinking diversity in learning science: The logic of everyday sensemaking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 529-552.doi: 10.1002/tea.1017
Wegerif, R. (2007). Dialogic education and technology: Expanding the space of learning (Vol. 7). New York: Springer.
Werner, H., & Kaplan, B. (1963). Symbol formation: An organismic developmental approach to language and the expression of thought. NY: John Wiley.
Wertsch, J. (1991). Voices of the Mind. A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Mind. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press.
Zittoun, T., & Cerchia, F. (2013). Imagination as expansion of experience. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 47(3), 305-324. doi:10.1007/s12124-013-9234-2
Zittoun, T., & Gillespie, A. (2016). Imagination in human and cultural development. London: Routledge.