How can different disciplinary perspectives meet and lead to a deeper understanding of science literacy learning in an educational design approach? Especially in multilingual settings, science teachers need an understanding and a repertoire to move between daily and scientific discourses and to connect new concepts and wordings to students’ daily knowledge and language in the language of instruction (Jakobsson, Mäkitalo & Säljö 2009). Understanding this learning and teaching of science literacy requires a multidisciplinary approach. In this international Roundtable session we present and discuss short video clips from teacher discussions and classroom data from the Swedish Science and Literacy Teaching (SALT) project. In specific the Clarke & Hollingworth (2002) model of teacher growth is used while analyzing. The model distinguishes between teachers personal domain of knowledge and beliefs, practice domain of experimenting in the classroom, domain of consequence including salient student outcomes and the external domain of school based professional development. Having previewed the selected video clips, presenters from two other multilingual contexts give their comments on the analytical approach drawing on their own research in science teaching in multilingual settings. The audience is invited to actively discuss the contributions of different disciplines to the analyses of these concrete science classroom data. Clarke, D. & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education 18, 948-967. Jakobsson, A., Mäkitalo, Å., & Säljö, R. (2009). Conceptions of knowledge in research on students' understanding of the greenhouse effect: Methodological positions and their consequences for representations of knowing. Science Education, 93(6), 978-995.

Del 6 är den första av två delar som behandlar den tredje förmågan i kursplanerna för fysik, biologi och kemi, alltså att använda naturvetenskapens begrepp, modeller och teorier för att beskriva och förklara samband i naturen, samhället och människokroppen. Syftet med del 6 är att reflektera över innebörden av förmåga 3 för undervisning i år 1-3. Du ska också bekanta dig med en didaktisk modell för att skapa progression inom förmåga 3. Med progression menas här att bygga upp undervisningen så att eleverna får hjälp att successivt nå kursplanernas mål.

The aim of the study is to analyse teachers’ efforts to develop secondary school students’ knowledge and argumentation skills of what constitutes scientific theories. The analysis is based on Leontiev’s three-level structure of activity (activity, action, and operation), as these levels correspond to the questions why, what, and how content is taught. The unit of analysis was a school development project in science education, where design-based interventions were conducted. Data comprised notes and minutes from eight meetings, plans, and video recordings of the lessons, and a written teacher evaluation. The teachers’ (n = 7) learning actions were analysed to identify (a) concept formation in science education, (b) expressions of agency, (c) discursive manifestations of contradictions, and (d) patterns of interaction during the science interventions. Three lessons on what constitutes scientific theories were implemented in three different student groups (n = 24, 23, 24), framed by planning and evaluation meetings for each lesson. The results describe (1) the ways in which teachers became more skilled at ensuring instruction met their students’ needs and (2) the ways in which teachers’ operations during instruction changed as a result of their developed knowledge of how to express the content based on theoretical assumptions.

This study investigated beliefs about climate change among Swedish secondary school students at the end of their K-12 education. An embedded mixed method approach was used to analyse 51 secondary school students’ written responses to two questions: (1) What implies climate change? (2) What affects climate? A quantitative analysis of the responses revealed that ‘Earth’, ‘human’ and ‘greenhouse effect’ were frequent topics regarding the first question, and ‘pollution’, ‘atmosphere’ and ‘Earth’ were frequent regarding the second. A qualitative analysis, based on a ‘conceptual elements’ framework, focused on three elements within responses: atmosphere (causes and/or consequences), Earth (causes and consequences) and living beings (humans and/or animals and their impacts on climate change). It revealed a predominantly general or societal, rather than individual, perspective underlying students’ responses to the second question. The ability to connect general/societal issues with individual issues relating to climate change could prompt students to reflect on the contributions of individuals towards climate change mitigation, thereby constituting a basis for decision-making to promote a sustainable environment. Although the students did not discuss climate changes from an individual perspective, their statements revealed their understanding of climate change as a system comprising various components affecting the overall situation. They also revealed an understanding of the difference between weather and climate.

In recent years, the increased globalization has led to Swedish science classrooms, just as in the rest of Europe, involving a variety of languages and cultures, which places particular demands on science education. The use of the functionally scientific language is characterized by complexity, which often hinders students’ learning in science. For students whose first language is different than the language of instruction, this can be a great challenge. In this presentation, we relate to two studies – (1) a web-based vocabulary test, and (2) an ethnographic study of a translanguaging science classroom – to illustrate how multilingual students’ use of translanguaging can constitute a resource for science learning. The studies reveal that multilingual students move in loops between discursive and national languages in their conversations about the scientific content. The students commonly use their first language (Arabic) when moving toward an everyday discourse and use their second language (Swedish) when approaching the scientific discourse. Moreover, analyses show how the students often use both Swedish and Arabic to clarify semantic relationships between scientific words and concepts in translanguaging science classrooms (TSC). The students commonly express the subject-specific words in Swedish, while the descriptive, clarifying, interconnecting words and phrases describing the semantic relationships often are expressed in Arabic. In this way, both Arabic and Swedish become linguistic and cognitive tools when students learn science. With increased awareness of the complex subject-specific language and multilingual students’ use of their entire linguistic repertoires in a TSC, increased conditions for the development of significant pedagogical tool can be created that can help science educators frame learning in linguistically and culturally diverse classrooms and give students greater opportunities to participate in the science instruction contexts, to influence their learning situation and to put students in a position as co-constructors of their own learning.

Over the past decades, languages and literacies have become a prominent focus in science education research and practice. While there is broad consensus on the central roles of disciplinary, representational, and cultural languages and their associated literacies in learning and teaching science, the field faces a critical moment. An ever-growing number of new theoretical and methodological perspectives have revealed rich facets of the multilingual and multimodal nature of learning processes in science. These developments prompt us to reflect on the distinct identity and impact of languages and literacies on the contemporary discourse in science education, especially in light of technological innovations (e.g. large-language models) and societal developments (e.g. multilingual contexts). This position paper offers an opportunity to assess the field's past developments and future directions, building on a recent meeting of the Special Interest Group (SIG) on Languages and Literacies in Science Education under the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA). We present viewpoints from four founding members of the SIG, discussing current trends, challenges, and visions for the future. Ultimately, this paper invites our global community to engage in informed dialogues on the role and value of languages and literacies in science education today.

An international group of biology education researchers offer their views on areas of scholarship that might positively impact our understanding of teaching and learning in biology and potentially inform practices in biology and life science instruction. This article contains a series of essays on topics that include a framework for biology education research, considerations in the preparation of biology teachers, increasing accessibility to biology for all learners, the role and challenges of language in biology teaching, sociocultural issues in biology instruction, and assisting students in coping with scientific innovations. These contributions are framed by a discussion of the value of defining several potential “grand challenges” in biology education.

This study investigated meaning-making of arrows in a representation of the greenhouse effect among 14-year-old secondary school students. Data was generated during Biology lessons where 74 students discussed how they interpreted a representation from the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation, which is an NGO that produce school material . The students were divided into 33 groups, who made written notes. In addition 12 groups were videotaped and eleven of these groups were interviewed a week later. The analysis focused on meaning-making of the arrows in the representation with the starting point that the arrows were represented in two distinctive ways, colour (yellow/orange) and shape (straight/curved/wavy). The result show that the colour yellow was strongly connected to the Sun whereas orange was connected to heat. The mode waviness made meaning-making more diverse and the coupling to the colour orange triggered interpretations about heat and different emissions and gases. One implication is that arrows are interpreted in the light of everyday experiences. In order to make sense in a more scientific way the arrows need unpacking and contextualisation. The overall connection between meaning-making and representation was captured by one group as: "It is an easy representation, if you understand it".

When pondering the question of future research needs in biology didactics I think that one of my previous research threads and one current are extra important, both concern secondary classrooms. The previous research methodology includes collaboration with practicing teachers with the aim of investigating and developing teachers’ professional knowledge in terms of PCK, pedagogical content knowledge - but in action. This means that it is the classroom practice that is foregrounded and “enacted PCK” not beliefs or theoretical knowledge about how to teach. Inspired by design-based research and Japanese lesson studies I have lead groups of biology teachers when they plan, enact and asses teaching about specific objects of learning. For example, “gene to expression”, “what constitutes a scientific theory” or “circulation of food and oxygen in the human body”. The point of departure is that improvement is more sustainable if enacted in teachers own authentic practice, in collaboration with their colleagues and the researchers have to be prepared to share their competence in areas that matter for the teachers. Currently I am engaged in SALT (Science and Literacy Teaching) which is a “content and language integrated learning project”, funded by the Swedish research council where we investigate the development of students’ scientific knowledge when introducing selected literacy aspects. We work in collaboration with teachers in multicultural classrooms and develop literacy strategies such as reading and writing in science. However, literacy in science classroom includes models, graphs, formulas and other representations that are mathematical, visual and verbal. Representations that often are displayed and produced with digital media and especially we focus important semantic patterns in biology, for example casual explanations, levels of organization, modeling etc. Future research need to keep on investigating the multimodal ways that biology is communicated with. Biology classrooms has always made use of drawings, animations and physical models but now we need more attention towards digital animations and models and how they give new affordances and hinders. Examples of affordances might be more convenient and easier-made teaching materials, while examples of new challenges are that pseudo-science is faster spread and the correspondence between important semantic patterns in biology and the digital representation might be blurred; the need of a scaffolding teacher is still important. Another pressing, but more regional issue concerns the large cohorts of new arrivals of refuges, for example in Sweden and Germany (and of course Greece but with somewhat more severe societal implications) and their future education. My hypothesis is that more focus on integrating content and language would be beneficial for newcomers who in many cases have conceptual knowledge, but expressed in other languages that Swedish. However, this has to be regarded as question which needs empirical research. Both examples of “future needs of research” will in my opinion are best conducted in collaboration with teachers in their authentic classroom practice – research with teachers and not on teachers.

Naturvetenskap kommuniceras med mängder av olika representationer och syftet med denna presentation är att visa en analysmodell för elevers meningsskapande vad gäller multipla representationer. Utgångspunkter är Lemkes terminologi för språket som meningsskapande samt teoretiska modeller: Peirce´s triad modell, Dewey´s end-in-view samt Johansson & Wickman´s organiserande syften för hur meningsskapande av representationer sker. Detta leder till en analysmodell som prövas på ett en serie lektioner i årskurs åtta där eleverna producerar en representation av sammanhang i kroppen. När eleverna producerade en representation av ämnes cirkulation i kroppen blev en del teman föremål för förhandling, exempelvis transport av ämnen och transformation av ämnen. Språkligt berör förhandlingen ordnivån och semantiska mönster (orden tillsammans). Ämnen som kommer in i kroppen benämndes först som mat och luft, men under diskussionen om hur dessa ämnens transport skulle visualiseras uppstod ett behov av att förklara hur ämnena tar sig mellan organ. Eleverna införde metaforen ”hoppa över”, exempelvis hoppar syre över från lungorna till blodet och genom att använda en mellanspråklig metafor som ”hoppa” kunde eleverna fortsätta sitt arbete (de upplevde end-in-view). När transport skulle visualiseras representerades ”hoppet” med pilar och text. Här handlar det om benämningar av ämnen (ord-nivå) i en riktning mot ett alltmer vetenskapligt språkbruk, exempelvis mat-näring- näringsämnen-glukos och luft-syresyremolekyl. Texten ledde till ett behov av att representera transformation av ämnen och här skapade den spatiala restriktionen (Prain & Tytler, 2012) ett behov av formelskrivning förklaring på olika organisationsnivåer som semantiska mönster.

SALT är ett treårigt forskningsprojekt finansierat av Vetenskapsrådet (2015-2018) som rör språk- och kunskapsutveckling inom högstadiets naturvetenskapliga ämnen med speciellt fokus på flerspråkiga klassrum. Projektet är ett tvärvetenskapligt samarbete mellan Malmö högskola och Göteborgs universitet, med forskare som representerar naturvetenskapernas didaktik och språkdidaktik inom utbildningsvetenskapligt inriktade forskningsområden. Från Malmö högskola deltar Maaike Hajer (projektledare), Anders Jakobsson, Annika Karlsson, Maria Kouns, Pia Nygård Larsson och Clas Olander samt från Göteborgs universitet Sofie Johansson och Anna Lyngfelt. Generellt behöver vi mer kunskaper om hur lärande i olika skolämnen går till och projektets fokus på lärande i naturvetenskap grundar sig i ett intresse för ´scientific literacy´, vilket också är det som exempelvis PISA-undersökningen avser att mäta. Det betyder att i skolämnena biologi, fysik och kemi ska såväl konceptuella, experimentella och kommunikativa förmågor utvecklas. Projektets bärande idé är att utveckling av dessa förmågor bäst stöttas genom att integrera språk- och kunskapsutvecklande arbetssätt. Lärande i naturvetenskap innebär att lära sig det naturvetenskapliga språket. Ett språk som i likhet med andra discipliner har specifika begrepp men också specifika semantiska mönster, dvs. sätt att organisera och kommunicera kunskapsinnehållet. Exempelvis är lärobokstexter informationstäta och kräver speciella lässtrategier men det handlar också tolkning av multimodala representationer, formellt matematiskt- och formelspråk, hierarkiska organisationsnivåer etc. Våra forskningsfrågor rör hur literacykompetenser utvecklas i lärares arbete med högstadieelever i flerspråkiga klassrum. Det betyder att det främst är utveckling av lärares kompetens som studeras och vi avser att utveckla didaktiska redskap som främjar lärande av naturvetenskap i flerspråkiga klassrum. För att möta dessa ambitioner genomförs en Educational Design Research-studie, som avser skapa både teoretisk förståelse och praktiska produkter. Vi samarbetar med NO-lärare på två högstadieskolor, där nuvarande undervisningspraktik dokumenteras och kortare interventioner genomförs där språk- och kunskapsutvecklande arbetssätt planeras, prövas och utvärderas.

Previous research has pointed to the benefits for students’ learning when language and literacy perspectives are included in science teaching. This extends the level of specific scientific vocabulary, but can be understood in a broader sense as increasing students’ competence of dynamically using registers in different functional contexts. In this paper, we explore teachers’ understanding of the role of language in science instruction and investigate which aspects of this role teachers emphasize when discussing students’ learning. The data consists of observations and documentation of teachers’ discussions during an in-service training course about language and literacy perspectives in science teaching. The analysis reveals the existence of different approaches or categories when it comes to including language perspectives in teaching science. The results suggest that teachers tend to interpret the inclusion of language and literacy perspectives as an increased focus on scientific concepts. Another common approach was to prompt students to replace everyday expressions with scientific ones. However, language and literacy perspectives comprise a wide range of aspects such as creating a relationship between everyday expressions and scientific language, understanding the use of hybrid languages and highlighting a general vocabulary. We conclude that there is a need to continue discussing how different aspects of language and literacy may help strengthen students’ engagement and learning in science.

Around the world, programs have been developed for science teachers’ work on literacy in multilingual settings with the assumption that science teachers need an understanding and a repertoire to move between daily and scientific discourses. This poster presentation reports from a project which aims to gain a better understanding of the development of literacy in science teaching through the study of meaning construction in multilingual secondary classrooms in which teacher, students and texts interact. To that end, leading experts in the field of text analyses, science pedagogy, second language learning and educational linguistics, join their forces in a double case study. These different perspectives on scientific literacy are starting point for small-scale interventions that analyses the interaction of teacher, student and task characteristics. Data is generated through mixed-method approach and include video recording of teachers planning meetings and classroom practice (whole class and student group work) along with questionnaires. Furthermore is students’ written work collected and interviews with teachers and focus group interviews with students. The quantitative data comprises of multiple-choice tests where three types of words chosen from students’ textbooks are probed: science concepts, homonyms and general academic words. The preliminary results indicate that time spent in the Swedish school system is decisive; it is almost a linear correlation between results on word tests and the time the students have learned Swedish. Furthermore, it seems that the general academic words raise the greatest challenges. The analysis of the teachers’ professional development make use of the interconnected model for professional growth (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002) and the results indicate that although the teachers had extensive experience in teaching multilingual students they broaden their competence with new insights an teaching strategies.

Del 7 är den andra av två delar som behandlar förmåga 3, nu med fokus på vad som utmärker språket NO-ämnena. Utgångspunkten är att språk- och kunskapsutveckling är två sidor av samma mynt. De kan med andra ord inte skiljas åt. Syftet med del 7 är att reflektera över språkets roll i din undervisning av de naturorienterande ämnena när det gäller att använda begrepp, modeller och teorier. Med utgångspunkt i ett och samma centrala innehåll (blandning och lösning) ges exempel på språkinriktade undervisningsaktiviteter som ska öva användning av enskilda begrepp och begreppen tillsammans.

The aim of this proposal is to investigate students’ meaning-making processes of multiple representations during a teaching sequence about the human body in lower secondary school. Two main influences are brought together to accomplish the analysis, on the one hand, theories on signs and representations as scaffoldings for learning and, on the other hand, pragmatist theories on how continuity between the purposes of different inquiry activities can be sustained. Data consist of 10 videotaped and transcribed lessons with 14-year-old students (N=26) in Sweden. The analysis focussed instances where meaning of representations were negotiated. Findings indicate that continuity was established as a progression in use of language, towards a more scientific register but in a mode continuum between every day and scientific registers. In this process, the use of interlanguage expression enables the students and the teacher to keep on the conversation and explain more urgent issues to support of the end-in-view of the immediate action. Furthermore, understanding of the human body is dependent on explanations on multiple organisation levels and students learning progressions was afforded by representations that specifically pointed towards shift in organisation levels.

Several scholars (e.g., Martin & Veel, 1998; Seah et al., 2014) have emphasized that language usage in school science contexts may be characterized by high lexical density, abstraction, and technicality. In addition, the language in science classrooms has, according to Lemke (1990) specific characteristics related to the use of words, grammar, and semantic patterns that may be a particularly challenging issue. At the word-level, following Nation (2013) language use in science can be grouped into three categories: (a) science-exclusive words; concepts (e.g. allopatric, exothermic reaction, and force, (b) words found both in science and elsewhere, but with different meanings; homonyms (e.g. adapt, cycle, and energy), and (c) general academic words (e.g. converted, proceeds, and originates). All types of words are important in meaning making of science in order to appropriate the semantic pattern of how science is communicated in classrooms. In other words, teachers must understand how language influences learning and develop strategies to enhance students’ successful appropriation of scientific language in the continuum between daily and scientific registers and increase the students’ discursive awareness and mobility in relation to content and language (Authors, 2019; Schleppegrell, 2016).

Starting with the triadic idea from, among others, Nation (2013) have Authors (2019) developed a more fine-grained categorization with two main parts with three subcategories each. These are a) content neutral words divided in 1) common words (e.g. talk); 2) unusual words (e.g. disappointment) and 3) general academic words (e.g. consider) and b) content related words divided in 4) homonyms (e.g. pressure); 5) content-typical words (e.g. pollution) and 6) content-specific words (e.g. photosynthesis).

Aim and question

The aim of this project is to investigate language related issues in relation to meaning making of school science in multilanguage settings. This is done through a multidisciplinary and quantitative approach in Swedish secondary schools.

The specific research question focused is: what kind of words are challenging for students with Swedish language background and students with other language backgrounds.

Method

Methodology Meaning making of words was estimated through four different web-based vocabulary tests given to 232 students grade 7-9. Each test had 15 words selected from the textbook that the actual class would study two weeks later. One sentence was chosen, in which one word was made bold and the students were given four alternative suggestions as synonyms. The words belonged to five of the six categories mentioned above (common words was excluded) and academic/official dictionaries was used to categorize the words. Example of words in the textbooks that we chose were: 2) unusual words (e.g. contemplate); 3) general academic words (e.g. process); 4) homonyms (e.g. solution); 5) content-typical words (e.g. indicator) and 6) content-specific words (e.g. symbiosis). In addition, the students were asked about their first language and how long time they studied in Swedish school. This data made it possible to calculate potential significant differences between groups and categories of words.

Expected Outcomes

Findings On a general level, significant differences were found between the performance of students with Swedish as mother tongue and those with other mother tongues and within the group that arrived in Sweden later than school start. When focusing types of words, we first found a need to differentiate our previous model for interpretation of homonyms (group 4) into to two subcategories: 4a) colloquial but content related words and 4b) academic and content specific words. We found significant differences between Swedish as mother tongue and not were seen towards two categories: 3) general academic words (e.g. cause and consist of) and 4a) colloquial but content related words (e.g. pass and branch). Difficult word categories for all students were: academic and content-related words (e.g. trait and process) and academic and content-typical words (e.g. occur and indicator). It is not surprising that students with another mother tongue that Swedish score less on a general vocabulary test. It has been shown before but it indicates that the test is reliable.

Conclusion/discussion

The main contribution of this study is that it points towards types of words that are extra hard for the students to make meaning of. We argue that with respect to students with another mother tongue than the language of instruction it is especially important to give attention to the words that belong to the category general academic words. These general academic words are important in the science classroom since they are the “glue”, or connectors (Gibbons, 2003), between the concepts, and a scientific explanation is incomprehensible without the connectors that bind concepts (Silseth, 2018). It is hard to make sense of the important concepts without words like consist of or because. Therefore, science teaching should emphasize these words along with the concepts.

References 

Gibbons, P. (2003). Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in a content-based classroom. Tesol Quarterly, 37, 247–273.

Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex London: Routledge.

Martin, J. R., & Veel, R. (1998). Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science. London: Routledge.

Nation, I. S. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language Google eBook. Cambridge University Press.

Seah, L. H., Clarke, D. J., & Hart, C. E. (2014). Understanding the language demands on science students from an integrated science and language perspective. International Journal of Science Education, 36(6), 952–973.

Silseth, K. (2018). Students’ everyday knowledge and experiences as resources in educational dialogues. Instructional Science, 46(2), 291-313

The language in science classrooms has specific characteristics related to the use of words, grammar, and semantic patterns that may be a particularly challenging issue for students meaning making of science phenomena. The aim of the presented project is to investigate language related issues in relation to meaning making of school science in multilingual settings. This is done through a multidisciplinary (science education and linguistics) and quantitative approach in Swedish secondary schools. The research question is “what kind of words are challenging for students with Swedish language background and students with other language backgrounds”. Meaning making of words was estimated through web-based vocabulary tests given to 232 students in grade 7-9. In addition, the students were asked about their first language and how long time they studied in Swedish school. This data made it possible to calculate potential significant differences between groups of students and categories of words. On a general level, significant differences were found between the performance of students with Swedish as mother tongue and those with other mother tongues and within the group that arrived in Sweden later than school start. When focusing word types, we found differences between the groups in relation to two categories: “general academic words” (e.g. cause and consist of) and “colloquial but content related words” (e.g. pass and branch). On the other hand, difficult word categories for all students were “academic and content-related words” (e.g. trait and process) and “academic and content-typical words” (e.g. occur and indicator). We argue that, especially regarding students with another mother tongue than the language of instruction, it is important to give attention to the words that are general academic words along with the common focus on content-specific words – the concepts. 

The aim of this article is to investigate students’ meaning-making processes of multiple representations during a teaching sequence about the human body in lower secondary school. Two main influences are brought together to accomplish the analysis: on the one hand, theories on signs and representations as scaffoldings for learning and, on the other hand, pragmatist theories on how continuity between the purposes of different inquiry activities can be sustained. Data consist of 10 videotaped and transcribed lessons with 14-year-old students (N = 26) in Sweden. The analysis focused instances where meaning of representations was negotiated. Findings indicate that continuity is established in multiple ways, for example, as the use of metaphors articulated as an interlanguage expression that enables the students (and the teacher) to maintain the conversation and explain pressing issues in ways that support of the end-in-view of the immediate action. Continuity is also established between every day and scientific registers and between organisation levels as well as between the smaller parts and the whole system.

The rationale in this paper is that in order to make meaning of science in school, students are dependent on representations as mediating means. Besides that, learning concerns establishment of continuity between purposes, e.g. Johansson & Wickman (2011) suggested that learning progressions could be analysed from proximate purposes (close to students´ prior experiences) and ultimate purposes (more scientific ones). The aim is to investigate ways that secondary students, 14 years old, learn about the human body by focusing meaning-making of representations. The ultimate teaching purpose was articulated as “transportation and transformation of substances which will eventually reach the cells”. The research questions concern in what ways representations afford and hinder the students’ ways of making sense of the content The issue of exchange of substances came up early in the production of the representation because the students found it necessary to explain how material exchange across surfaces between organs was possible. The students decided that substances “jump” thus avoiding articulation of the specific mechanism and later the jump was visualized with arrows and text. The metaphor ‘jump’ offers an agreed term that ‘stands fast’ (Wickman, 2014) and allows students to move forward even though the material processes associated with jumping are not clear. It acts as a place holder metaphor that sequentially becomes more articulated and refined as students views of what is being exchanged, and where, are developed as part of the ultimate purposes of the sequence. The students started their conversations with naming the substances that enter the body using everyday terms like food and air however these words are replaced by nutrition/oxygen (intermediate wording) to nutrients/glucose and oxygen molecule. The gradual transformation of wording towards a more scientific language could be explained by the teacher´s re-phrasing when talking with students. Another reason might be that the affordance of visual diagrams lies in the way it productively constrains attention (Prain & Tytler, 2012) and thus creates a need for inclusion of other semiotic resources like arrows and formulas. The scientific language progression towards more discriminating and technical terms, as described above, is one of the key factors that scaffold the progression. Another factor is that the ambition of establishing continuity between proximate and ultimate purposes (Johansson & Wickman, 2011) seems to work for these activities. The students often ask each other “where does this substance go now?” or “how does it reach the cell?”.

This presentation will focus one result of a study that followed groups of teachers within an Erasmus+-partnership. The teachers conducted an interdisciplinary teaching about complex and controversial issues, including socio-scientific issues. Five schools, with students aged 12-16 years, in five different countries (Croatia, Poland, Italy, Sweden and Turkey) were involved. Through focus groups and participant observation, the study explored potential tensions that emerged during the enactment of the interdisciplinary teaching. Results show a variety of emerging tensions that might cause didactical dilemmas. The tensions are anchored both at different level, both concerning different types of curriculum goals and related to politics and religion, as well as those at the classroom level and at levels in between. One purpose of the study was to contribute to pre- and in-service teacher training and this resulted in a basis for a discussion tool. This tool is a didactic model aimed to raise awareness about both possibilities and potential negative consequences with different positions in didactical dilemmas. By means of abductive analysis, the empirical results of the study formed a basis for a model with four quadrant matrixes. In these matrixes, different tentative positions in didactical dilemmas are illuminated by fictional teachers that express statements about their position.

This study followed groups of teachers within an Erasmus+-partnership, in which the teachers conducted an intended reflexive and interdisciplinary teaching about complex and controversial issues, including socio-scientific issues. Five schools, with students aged 12-16 years, in five different countries (Croatia, Poland, Italy, Sweden and Turkey) were involved. The overall research design was inspired by research models where researchers and practitioners cooperate and share responsibility. Iterative systematic investigations have been done, when teachers with support of a teaching model created interdisciplinary arenas in their respective context. Through focus groups and participant observation, the study aims to explore potential tensions that emerge during the enactment of the interdisciplinary teaching. Preliminary results show a variety of emerging tensions that might cause didactical dilemmas. The tensions are anchored both at macro level, concerning different types of curriculum goals and related to politics and religion, as well as those at the classroom level and at levels in between.

This study has followed groups of teachers within an Erasmus + partnership, in which the teachers have conducted a reflexive and interdisciplinary teaching about complex controversial issues (CCI), including socio-scientific issues (SSI) (students aged 12-16 years). The overall research design is inspired by models where researchers and practitioners cooperate and share responsibility and iterative systematic investigations have been done. With the support of a didactic model the teachers created interdisciplinary arenas in their respective context. Through focus groups and participant observation, the study aims to describe the appearance of various didactic dilemmas that teachers encountered in the dilemmatic space this form of teaching is framed in. Preliminary results show didactic dilemmas anchored both at macro level, concerning different types of curriculum goals and politics and religion, as well as didactical dilemmas at micro level and at levels in between. For example, about student controlled activities versus teacher controlled and about the teacher’s level of objectivity and neutrality. With an approach of comparative didactics, a special focus is put on exploring the essence of the Swedish teachers’ didactic dilemmas in the dilemmatic space, in order to highlight some aspects of the “taken for granted” in their teaching.

How can teachers refne their strategies for purposefully engaging students in mathematicaldiscussions when students are working in groups and the teacher enters an ongoing groupconversation? In three educational design research cycles, four teachers collaborated witha researcher for one year to analyse, design and evaluate strategies for engaging students insmall-group mathematical discussions. The idea of noticing (Mason in Researching yourown practice: the discipline of noticing, RoutledgeFalmer, London, 2002; Sherin et al. inMathematics teacher noticing: seeing through teachers’ eyes, Taylor & Francis, New York,2011) was used to organize the fndings—by paying attention to aspects in the mathematical discussions and interpreting the interactions, teachers could together refne their ownactions/responses to better support students’ work. The Inquiry Co-operation Model ofAlrø and Skovsmose (Dialogue and learning in mathematics education: intention, refection, critique, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2004) was used as a theoreticalbase for understanding qualities in mathematical discussions. Ehrenfeld and Horn’s (EducStud Math 103(7):251–272, 2020) model of initiation-entry-focus-exit and participationwas for interpreting and organizing the fndings on teachers’ actions. The results show thatteachers became more aware of the importance of explicit instructions and their own role asfacilitators of mathematical questions to students, by directing specifc mathematical questions to all students within the groups. In this article, by going back and forth between whathappened in the teachers’ professional development group and in the classrooms, it waspossible to simultaneously follow the teachers’ development processes and what changedin students’ mathematical discussions.