Interplay of group dynamics and science talk in a design based classroom

This exploratory study investigated the interplay between science discourse and group dynamics of two groups of 6 graders over time as they learned in a technology-rich, inquiry-based science environment. Analysis showed that the group with problematic dynamics engaged in less science talk and failed to improve over time. Despite dynamics and dialogue differences between groups, both groups primarily focused on procedural aspects instead of science. Future studies of group collaboration over time are discussed. Small group collaboration is now an integral part of inquiry-based science learning, with an emphasis on “learning to talk science” (Lemke, 1990, p.1). While peer interactions comprising explanations, arguments, and examples can enhance learning (O’Donnell, 1999), studies reveal that students often focus on task outcomes instead of the science (Coleman, 1998), and share factual information instead of deeper explanations (Arvaja, Häkkinen, Rasku-Puttonen, & Eteläpelto, 2002). Although researchers have attempted to support collaboration with scripts and prompts (Coleman, 1998; O’Donnell, 1999), these have mainly focused on the content of collaboration. Group processes such as dominance, competitive interactions, and lack of mutual engagement (Arvaja et al., 2002; Barron, 2003) also pose challenges to collaboration. Barron has emphasized attending to the dual nature of collaborative learning –the content related dimension and the social dimension to understand factors affecting collaborative learning. In this paper, we report an exploratory study that investigated the interplay between the level of science discourse and group dynamics, as students learned in a technology-rich, inquiry-based science environment. We analyzed face-to-face (FTF) interactions as students collaborated in small groups around a single shared computer. Such FTF collaboration represents an emerging area of research in CSCL as students have to simultaneously manage their task and interactions (van Diggelen & Overdijk, 2007). In our study we examined the patterns of group dialogue and dynamics over time to understand the variability in group interactions. We investigated the following research question: How do group dynamics change with increasing familiarity with group members and task content, and affect the quality of science talk over time?