Science-related Identity Development

Jeanne Chowning

Carlone, H., Scott, C. M., & Lowder, C. (2014). Becoming (less) scientific: A longitudinal study of students' identity work from elementary to middle school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(7), 836-869.

This paper summarizes findings from a longitudinal case study focused on the development of science-related identities of three science students. The research, which utilized data mostly from classroom observations and interviews, traced the trajectory of the students from their fourth through sixth grade science classes.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The research questions explored were:

1) What is the nature of the available and celebrated subject position(s) in each year of school science?

2) How did the students’ consistent identity work in each year of school science position them in relation to the celebrated subject position(s) in each year of school science? (p. 841)

Additionally, the researchers examined how race, class, and gender impacted students’ identity development and positioning in science classrooms. Drawing on social practice theory in general, and the construct of ‘figured worlds’ in particular, the researchers examined the ways students described themselves (or performed), and the how the meanings of their identity work was influenced by the context of particular classroom cultures. 

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

The authors relied heavily on ‘figured worlds’ in describing the social contexts they examined, defining them as “sociohistoric, collective ‘realms of interpretation’ that provide the ‘contexts of meaning for actions, cultural productions, performances, disputes, for the understandings that people come to make of themselves, and for the capabilities that people develop to direct their own behavior in these worlds’ (p. 838, citing Holland, Lachicotte, Skinner & Cain, 1998, p. 60).  Seeing students as positioned in various figured worlds helped the authors explore the tension between structure (how a conceptual figured world, with its normative guidelines, helps shape interactions and beliefs) and agency (how individuals can define themselves in relation to, and even push back on the strictures of the ‘world’.

In addition to exploring figured worlds that students inhabited, the researchers also defined the “celebrated subject positions” in each of the classrooms they observed.  Using a framework from Duschl and Kelly (2002), they focused on patters of epistemic practices, communicative practices, and investigative practices to reveal:

• What counts as science in a setting?
• What counts as being a ‘good’ science participant?
• What are the obligations of positioning oneself as aligned with/able to fill the celebrated subject positions? 
• What are the relevant figured worlds that shape what counts? (p. 842)

 FINDINGS

In 4th grade, “students’ identity work was an important resource leveraged to align oneself with celebrated subject positions. Being scientific, being a good class member, and being “me” were mutually reinforcing performances” (p. 847). Figured worlds that they identified in the 4th grade class included “reform-based science”, “family”, and “childhood.” By contrast, the students’ experiences in 6th grade took place within figured worlds of “traditional school science”, “authoritative paternalism/hegemonic masculinity” “jock masculinity”, and “adolescence.” Within this class, the celebrated subject position was the “perfect performer.” The researchers examined how issues of race, class, and gender figured into the construction of identity for the students they studied. It might be tempting to invoke a simple narrative of “reform-minded” versus “traditional” teacher in this analysis. However, the researchers take pains to note that they did not wish to entirely put the blame on the 6th grade teacher for the challenges in the way students positioned themselves – they also identified the larger social/structural forces at play that perpetuate the systems observed (such as budget cuts, parental pressures, and inclusion of large number of students with special needs).

IMPORTANT POINT

In considering scientific identity development in classrooms, the nexus of “celebrated subject positions” and “figured worlds” can either reinforce or conflict with students’ own developing conceptions of themselves: “In fourth grade, all students benefited greatly from the fact that their social identity work was leveraged in service of learning and doing robust school science.  In other words, what counted as “being scientific” was tightly interwoven with what it meant to be [particular students]. This meant that their identity work was much less problematic, contentious, or threatening. (p. 859). In contrast, by the 6th grade, the celebrated subject position was not aligned with scientific practices, and thus students were not held accountable to “being scientific.”

QUESTIONS

1) How would you describe the “figured worlds” of the science classrooms you experienced?  What role did they play in reinforcing or contradicting your own identity work? 

2) In their conclusion, the researchers ask the following question that emphasizes the challenges inherent to maintaining science-related interests/identity between elementary and middle school:

School science is subject to strong institutional and cultural narratives of what counts as legitimate science, is often configured too narrowly, and leaves little room to celebrate and productively leverage different kinds of students’ science-related interests and identity work. However, the fourth grade science case points to the promise of disrupting those dominant narratives. The question remains: Is it possible to re-figure a middle school science classroom in similarly accessible ways when structures of race, class, and gender become increasingly salient in the social lives of adolescents and the figured worlds of traditional schooling and school science? How can we begin to imagine such as space? (p. 865)

Middle school, with its increasing focus on disciplinary specialization, provides particular challenges to creating spaces for supporting scientific identity development. Furthermore, middle school is a time where identity becomes a highly charged aspect of adolescent existence. What kinds of structural changes will be necessary to support students in aligning their identities with scientific ones in middle school and beyond?

3) The researchers call out the emphasis on engaging students in science and engineering practices in the NGSS as “productive for designing and evaluating equitable classrooms” (p. 865).  How will specific science and engineering practices need to be taken up in classrooms in order to align student’s self-conceptions with scientific identity?  Are there other elements of NGSS that bear on the question of science-related identity development?