Developing analysis frameworks for scientific literacy activities

of 25/25
ΑΡΘΡΟΓΡΑΦΙΑ [Σελ. 5 – 29] Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy Activities Paris Papadopoulos 1 , Fanny Seroglou 2 ΠΕΡΙΛΗΨΗ: Η έρευνά μας εστιάζεται στην ανάπτυξη συγκριτικών παρουσιάσεων και πλαισίων ανάλυσης που στοχεύουν στην ερμηνεία δεδομένων που προέρχονται από διδακτικές εφαρμογές επιστημονικού εγραμματισμού και εφαρμόζονται στη σχολική τάξη. Παρουσιάζουμε πολλαπλές προσεγγίσεις ανάλυσης δεδομένων, από τη μελέτη μιας βιντεοσκοπημένης διδακτικής εφαρμογής θεατρικής πρακτικής αντιπαράθεσης επιχειρημάτων με θέμα: «Τα καιρικά φαινόμενα». Η ανάλυση των δεδομένων μέσω του μοντέλου ανάλυσης 3D-5I μας δίνει πληροφορίες που αφορούν γνωστικές και μετα-γνωστικές δεξιότητες (και παράλληλα όψεις της φύσης της επιστήμης) και στάσεις και συμπεριφορές στο πλαίσιο της θεωρίας της πολλαπλής νοημοσύνης. Τα δεδομένα αφορούν σε μία αντιπαράθεση επιχειρημάτων διάρκειας 8 λεπτών που υλοποιήθηκε από μαθητές και μαθήτριες 11ετών της Τετάρτης τάξης Δημοτικού Σχολείου. Το μοντέλο ανάλυσης 3D – 5I αφορά σε τρεις διαστάσεις της μάθησης και διδασκαλίας στις φυσικές επιστήμες (Γνωστική, Μετα-γνωστική και Συναισθηματική) και πέντε είδη νοημοσύνης από τη θεωρία του Gardner (Γλωσσική, Ενδοπροσωπική, Διαπροσωπική, Κιναισθητική και Χωρική-Οπτική), (3D:3 dimensions & 5I:5 Intelligences) και καταλήγει στα παρακάτω συμπεράσματα: α) Στη γνωστική διάσταση μαθητές και μαθήτριες εμπλέκονται με επιτυχία σε συζητήσεις που αφορούν το περιεχόμενο των φυσικών επιστημών και παράλληλα φαίνεται ότι ενεργοποιούν δεξιότητες πειραματισμού και παρατήρησης. β) Στη μετα-γνωστική διάσταση προβληματίζονται και εμπλέκονται σε συζητήσεις που αφορούν σε θέματα της φύσης των φυσικών επιστημών και αναστοχάζονται για τη φύση του περιεχομένου των φυσικών επιστημών και τη μεθοδολογία τους, εκφράζοντας παράλληλα τον προβληματισμό τους στο δίλημμα του πότε η επιστημονική γνώση αποτελεί μια μορφή «απόλυτης» αλήθειας ή απλά είναι μια ανθρώπινη κατασκευή που εξελίσσεται και διαφοροποιείται μέσα στο χρόνο. γ) Όσο αφορά τη συναισθηματική διάσταση συνολικά όλοι οι μαθητές και οι μαθήτριες δραστηριοποιούνται και εκδηλώνουν ένα ιδιαίτερο ενδιαφέρον και για την εμπλοκή τους με τη διδακτική εφαρμογή της αντιπαράθεσης των επιχειρημάτων και παράλληλα αναδεικνύουν θετική στάση προς τον κόσμο των φυσικών επιστημών. δ) Τα αποτελέσματα που αφορούν την ανάλυση δεδομένων στο πλαίσιο της πολλαπλής νοημοσύνης δείχνουν, ότι το κοινωνικό και επιστημονικό περιβάλλον της αντιπαράθεσης των επιχειρημάτων ενθαρρύνει μαθητές και μαθήτριες, να εκφραστούν γλωσσικά με ξεκάθαρο και επαρκή τρόπο ώστε να γίνουν κατανοητοί από τους συνομιλητές τους. Προβαίνουν σε υποθέσεις, προβλέψεις, συμπεράσματα και αξιολογήσεις και αναδεικνύουν δεξιότητες δημιουργικής φαντασίας. Παράλληλα υπάρχουν σημαντικά στοιχεία που καταγράφουν την ενεργοποίηση της ενδοπροσωπικής, διαπροσωπικής, κιναισθητικής και χωρικής-οπτικής νοημοσύνης. Abstract: Our research focuses on developing comparative presentations and analysis frameworks for the interpretation of data coming from scientific literacy activities applied in the classroom. In this case, we present multiple data analysis approaches coming from the study of a videotaped activity concerning a debate on weather phenomena. The analysis of data using the 3D-5I research model 1 Paris Papadopoulos, is a school advisor in elementary school in Greece and a member of ATLAS research group. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Fanny Seroglou, is an assistant professor in the School of Primary Education at the Faculty of Education in the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, in Greece. Since 2003 she is the head of the ATLAS research group (ATLAS is the acronym of A Teaching and Learning Approach for Science) ATLAS Research Group, School of Primary Education, Faculty of Education, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece. E-mail: [email protected]
  • date post

  • Category


  • view

  • download


Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Developing analysis frameworks for scientific literacy activities

  • 1. [. 5 29]Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy ActivitiesParis Papadopoulos1, Fanny Seroglou 2: . , : . 3D-5I - ( ) . 8 11 . 3D 5I (, - ) Gardner (, ,, -), (3D:3 dimensions & 5I:5 Intelligences) :) . ) - , .) .) , , . , , . ,, - .Abstract: Our research focuses on developing comparative presentations and analysis frameworks forthe interpretation of data coming from scientific literacy activities applied in the classroom. In this case,we present multiple data analysis approaches coming from the study of a videotaped activityconcerning a debate on weather phenomena. The analysis of data using the 3D-5I research model1Paris Papadopoulos, is a school advisor in elementary school in Greece and a member of ATLASresearch group. E-mail: [email protected] Seroglou, is an assistant professor in the School of Primary Education at the Faculty ofEducation in the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, in Greece.Since 2003 she is the head of the ATLAS research group (ATLAS is the acronym of A Teaching andLearning Approach for Science)ATLAS Research Group, School of Primary Education, Faculty of Education, Aristotle University ofThessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece. E-mail: [email protected]

2. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy Activitiesprovides us with information concerning cognitive and meta-cognitive skills (including nature-of-scienceaspects), attitudes as well as multiple intelligences coming from an 8 minutes debate that is performedby 11-year-olds. The 3D 5I (3 Dimensions 5 Intelligences) analysis matrix leads to the followingresults: a) In the cognitive dimension, pupils successfully discuss about the science content and activateobservation and experimentation skills. b) In the meta-cognitive dimension, pupils reflect on the natureof science in their discussions and reconsider the nature of the content and of the methodology ofscience, the dilemma whether scientific knowledge is a form of absolute truth or a human constructthat evolves and changes in time. c) In the emotional dimension, all students are interested and highlymotivated to participate and express a positive attitude towards science. d) Results coming from dataanalysis in the framework of multiple intelligences show that the social and scientific framework of thedebate encourages pupils to use a more lucid language and various skills such as creative fantasy,assumption, prediction, reasoning and evaluation. There has also been recorded substantial evidencethat pupils interpersonal, intrapersonal, bodily-kinaesthetic and spatial intelligence are activated.Key words: analysis frameworks, scientific literacy activities, classroom data, cognitive, meta-cognitive,emotional dimension, multiple intelligences, argumentation, role-play, activated, skills, attitudes.Scientific literacy activitiesNowadays, teachers, educated and trained in the traditional science education context, areasked to teach their students in the current scientific literacy trend. At the same time thescientific literacy approach is very new to students as well. They also have to go through ashift from the traditional to the scientific literacy for all style of learning. What changes arehappening in the way teachers teach? What kind of interactions are challenged or recordedin the classroom? What skills and attitudes are encouraged? There is a need for developinganalysis frameworks for studying and interpreting the effect of scientific literacy practices inthe classroom. This way, science education researchers will be able to gather informationvaluable both for science teaching and for teacher-training. With this paper, we attempt tocontribute to the development of frameworks that evaluate scientific literacy activities. Our starting point has been a review on the suggested aims of teaching in the scientificliteracy context. Researchers point out that scientific literacy for all involves goals related topersonal growth, professional development and citizenship (Bybee, 1997). Additionally,scientific literacy aims to the development of target-skills concerning the capacity to usescientific knowledge, to identify questions and to draw evidence-based conclusions in orderto understand and help make decisions about the natural world and changes made to itthrough human activity (Kjrnsli, 2009). Nevertheless, the adoption of scientific literacyeducational objectives entails consequences for the content, organization and pedagogy ofschool science education that could be characterized as profound and radical (Jenkins, 1990).In this approach pupils besides learning science contents, need to become acquainted withand have an appreciation for the nature of science (Matthews, 1994). Scientific literacy may become the essential baggage for understanding the world in asociety with such an increasing scientific and technological development. Scientific literatecitizens are to make informed choices about their health care, the environment and thesociety they live in. They need to develop skills for critically analyzing the validity of givenarguments presented in the media or in public discussions as well as for coming to logicalconclusions and decision-making based on scientific information rather than on propagandaor bias. In teaching science one of the most difficult task is that the instructor, must confrontthe obstacle of motivating pupils to take an active interest in abstract and complextheoretical issues. All too often the pupils find the various science concepts covered in sucha course, to be too difficult and, in their eyes, un-motivating (especially when comparedwith, e.g., an ethics or aesthetics course). Scientific literacy can be viewed asmultidimensional and a synthesis of various scientific aspects: concepts and ideas, the natureof science, the interaction of science and society (Bybee, 1997,1999; Fensham, 2002; Hurd, 6 : 40-41 3. Papadopoulos & Seroglou1997; Laugksch, 2000; Solomon, 2001; Millar, 1983). Researchers believe that in school wecould tempt pupils into a lifelong interest in science through exciting and contentious newphenomena, such as genetic engineering, climate change, brain and memory, or the origin oflife in space (Solomon & Thomas, 1999; Tsarsiotou & Seroglou, 2011; Seroglou et al, 2011).Our pupils demand a science education that has meaning and significance for their lives. Theywant to address science issues they hear about through media, and get a bigger picture ofhow scientific concepts fit together in the overall scheme of todays world: to see more of thebuilding, in short, and less of the bricks. Pupils want greater autonomy and creativity inlearning, including more practical work, more extended investigations and moreopportunities to express views or discuss controversial issues. New methodologicalapproaches should be used in order to achieve teaching science for all. The target skillsdeveloped in school need to be reassessed, as do the ways in which pupils are expected tolearn. One obvious method of overcoming this dilemma is to provide science issues throughalternative and dynamic didactic methods, providing art-informed teaching strategies such asrole-play practises, which are definitely less complicated than general descriptions oftheories, articulate the main points (meta-cognitive, nature of science) more clearly, andhave the added bonus of being more personal and relatable. Role-play activities can serve toinvolve and motivate students to develop an understanding of the world that is rooted in thescientific and humanistic traditions in keeping with a more integrated, holistic view ofknowledge. It helps pupils formulate ideas and stimulate debate, by offering usefulopportunities for speculation and hypothesis. These role-plays can both illustrate thescientists or non-experts ideas, but also raise the students interests in and enjoyment of theteaching content. They provide a dynamic environment for studying scientific concepts andbringing forward the elements and questions that pupils face in their everyday life inside oroutside school. So debate through role-play has much to contribute to the composing life ofthe primary school, while as a teaching instrument is a holistic methodology that creates theexperiential and social educational experiences that Dewey advocates (Dewey, 1934, 1997)and which also appeals to the variable learning styles and multiple intelligences that HowardGardner promotes (Gardner, 1983; 1994; 1997; 1999). Besides, theatrical language isconsidered as the most essential human language, a form of knowledge and most of all, amedium for change and a mean of giving pupils the strength and confidence to overcometheir learning difficulties (Boal, 2007).Debate in science is a product of the use of drama and simulations in vivo. Since itinvolves children in physical and intellectual activities, it has a potential to elucidate scientificconcepts (McSharry & Jones, 2000). It can also be defined as a way of deliberatelyconstructing an approximation of aspects of a real life episode or experience, but undercontrolled conditions (Kofoed, 2006). Involving non-players in socio-dramatic play seems toprovide them with an adaptable medium for constructing meaningful connections among themany information fragments they are daily bombarded with. It provokes the formation ofmeaningful associations between new experiences and prior adaption (Dansky, 1980). Incontrolled studies measuring the use of drama in teaching science, greater meaningfullearning occurred when drama has been used (Metalcafe, 1984). Debate lies in anothertradition entirely: the humanities. We understand as teachers that the arts (music,movement, art drama) have great potential to contribute to learning across the curriculum(Koster, 2001). Especially in physics debate, makes a valuable contribution to pupilsunderstanding of the nature of science. In particular, there is a significant move away fromthe serendipitous empiricism and towards an appreciation of the interactive nature ofexperiment and theory. It may provide a widening experience for pupils to capture the wholepicture of science and also encourage the development of skills and attitudes in the contextof teaching science for citizenship and scientific literacy. Nevertheless, debate through role-play provides a cultural bridge between the two worlds, inside and outside of the school, for 40-41 : 7 4. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy Activitiesboth pupils and teachers (Seroglou, 2006; Papadopoulos & Seroglou, 2007; Papadopoulos &Seroglou, 2009). The theory behind the use of debate in science teaching and learning - aswith active, experiential or child-centered learning - is that children are encouraged to bephysically and intellectually involved in the classroom to allow them to both express them-selves in a scientific context and develop an understanding of difficult concepts (Taylor,1987). The key to debating through role-play, and the reason why role-play can help to makescience relevant to many children, is that it is based upon playing. By the time that childrenbegin to be educated in science, they are already very experienced at playing, since theypractice playing during their childhood. The desire to play, and therefore to learn, is afundamental part of human psychology and is a potentially powerful resource residing in thechildren themselves (Piaget, 1951). Debate in this context is a kind of simulation ormoral/ethical role-play and has to do with simulated meetings, simulated speeches and lifeconditions or human relationships (McSharry, et al., 2000). It can provide pupils withopportunities to explore a range of ideas other than their own and also introduce them to avariety of values and interpretations concerning the nature of science. When it is used forteaching science can be a stage for the formation of skills such as the ability of realizing social,ethical or political situations through a variety of different points of view (Seroglou, 2006;Bentley, 2000). Role-playing in science makes science teaching vivid and understandable.During this verbal negotiation process, children become aware of many aspects of the story,aspects other than their own. In order to engage in play, children have to accommodate theirviews to the views of others. One has to understand the characters (performed) point ofview in order to act convincingly. Defining the boundaries between the performer and thecharacter, the performer is forced into a meta-cognitive process and becomes a spect-actorbeing at the same time both the spectator of a story and the actor in the role-play (Boal,2006). Debating creates contexts in which pupils can simulate situations from outside theclassroom bridging practical knowledge with theoretical knowledge. Allows children torehearse and develop skills they will need for active citizenship, in a safe and non-threateningsituation (Seroglou 2006, Papadopoulos & Seroglou 2011). Skills as effective communicationand use of language in role-play, work beyond the nominal and descriptive, and require theapplication of higher order skills, such as synthesizing ideas in order to question, explain,reason, justify, form and express opinions. Social skills such as working collaboratively,sharing, listening and responding, compromising and reaching decisions are necessary forsuccessful interaction during the discussions that were evolved during the debate. In our case, pupils learn some concepts better as they study them throughcontroversial situations. A large part of this improvement has undoubtedly been due toinnovation enthusiasm and innovative active learning. In other words any strategy thatextends the sort time spam of the pupils attention is likely to improve learning, whether ornot includes drama practices. Using debate as a teaching method leads to better test scores,longer sustainability, increased pupil motivation and an augmented pupils appreciation thattheir work has been meaningful. Pupils appear more attentive and provide verbal and writtenresponses that indicate greater interest in the teaching content and a better understanding ofscience concepts (Papadopoulos, 2010). These new skills and attitudes related to teachingand learning science in the context of scientific literacy need to be classified and evaluatedthrough new analysis frameworks that may record and interpret such data.Our proposal for multiple data analysisIn our interpretation of data, a three dimensional cognitive, metacognitive andemotional framework (Seroglou & Koumaras, 2001; Seroglou, 2006) has been used coupledwith the theory of multiple intelligence (osniadou, 2001; Coleman 1995, 2006; Gardner1983, 1993, 1994, 1997, 1999; Guss 2005; Koster, 2001; Warrington, &Younger, 2006).According to the three dimensional framework of teaching and learning science (3D 8 : 40-41 5. Papadopoulos & Seroglouframework), we approach science teaching through three complementary dimensions(table1): a) The cognitive dimension dealing with pupils involvement in learning science,problem-solving skills, content management in verbal negotiation and learning and thinkingthrough observation and experiment. b) The meta-cognitive dimension concerning meta-cognitive skills activated when students reconsider the current interrelations of science andsociety, reflect on the nature of science aspects (such as history and philosophy of science,methods of science, evolution of scientific theories, ethics concerning science, science-societyhistorical interactions). Furthermore, skills concerning argumentation and causality styles arealso included in this meta-cognitive dimension. c) The emotional dimension reflecting the waypupils explore attitudes and values, their interest and motivation, the positive classroomclimate and the feeling that their work is meaningful.The 3D framework of teaching and learning scienceinvolvement in learning (c1)problem solving (c2) Cognitive Dimensioncontent management(c3)learning and thinking through observation &experiment (c4) reconsidering the interrelations of science and society (m1)history(m2a) reflecting on nature ofmethod (m2b) science considering its historic evolution (m2c) Metacognitive Dimension (m2) ethic(m2d)philosophy (m2e) argumentation (m3) causality (m4) exploring attitudes and values others than their own(e1) increased interest and motivation (e2) Emotional Dimension positive classroom climate(e3) feeling that their work is meaningful (e4) Table 1. Classification of skills and attitudes concerning the 3D framework of teaching and learning science.According to the five intelligences framework of teaching and learning science (5Iframework), we approach science teaching through five faculties of intelligence coming fromGardners theory of multiple intelligences (table 2): a) Verbal-linguistic intelligence referring tothe abilities of pupils to use narrative comprehension and narrative production to express 40-41 : 9 6. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy Activitiesoneself rhetorically and scientifically, to express through writing without the need of adultsupport, to get familiar with and use unfamiliar scientific vocabulary and to remember and usescientific information in their speech. b) Intrapersonal intelligence focusing on pupils capacityto express their feelings, to strengthen their self-awareness and self-esteem, to increase theirself-control, to make decisions and become more independent. The above includeappreciating ones feelings, fears, motivations, values and ideas, acquiring an effective workingmodel of one self and being able to use such information to regulate ones life. c) Interpersonalintelligence dealing with communicational and interactive skills, the capacity to understandthe intentions, motivations and desires of others when co-operating with them, the un-biasedinteraction with others and cooperatively learning in groups or with only one partner. d) Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence revealing the potential of using body-gesture symbols and activatingmental abilities to coordinate bodily movements, the involvement of acting and imitating skillswhen reproducing science related scenes in detail. e) Visual-spatial intelligence concerning theability of room-orientation, the engagement of creative fantasy, skills of mental perception andrepresentation. Recording the ways that students learn visually and organize things spatially(e.g. do, enjoy charts, graphs, maps, tables, illustrations, art, anything eye catching).The multiple intelligences framework of teaching and learning science increased narrative comprehension and production (l1) Linguistic decreasing need for adult support during writing (l2) Intelligence use of unfamiliar (scientific) vocabulary(l3) greater knowledge retaining(l4) expression of feelings (i1) self-esteem and self-awareness (i2) Intrapersonal self-control (i3) Intelligence decision making(i4) increasing independence(i5) social and communication skills(p1) Interpersonal sharing and working together in groups (p2) acceptance of difference (p3) intelligence participation through peer-group (p4) using body-gesture symbols (b1) Bodily-kinesthetic acting skills(b2) intelligenceability to observe carefully and then recreate scenes in detail (imitate)(b3) 10 : 40-41 7. Papadopoulos & Seroglousense of room-orientation(s1) Spatial intelligence creative fantasy (s2)mental perception and representation (s3) Table 2. Classification of skills and attitudes concerning the multiple intelligences framework 5I of teaching and learning science.Both in tables 1 and 2 each sub-category of dimensions and intelligences has a shortcode-name (e.g. involvement in learning has the code-name c1) that has been used in data-analysis and presentation of results.The combined framework that includes the three dimensions and the five intelligencesconcerning science teaching and learning is presented in figure 3 and is called the 3D-5Iframework. The whole framework functions as a set of structural guidelines to design sciencecourses and to evaluate their application. Figure 1. The combined 3D-5I frameworkThe framework functions in a dual way recording and pointing out both intelligencesand teaching-learning dimensions. Classroom activities may be analyzed and presented in amatrix revealing both intelligences and teaching-learning dimensions activated. Furthermore,the interaction of intelligences and teaching-learning dimensions is brought forward in aglance.A case study: Analysing a debate about weather phenomena A teaching course on weather phenomena has been designed and developedconsisting of debates through role-playing. The course titled How is the weather today? hasbeen attended by fifteen 10-year-olds in the primary school of Drymos in the area ofThessaloniki in Greece. The course has been part of the flexible zone of the Greek curriculumfor the primary school (the flexible zone is a subject-free period of the curriculum and in thiscontext teachers may develop various projects and activities with their pupils for two hoursper week). In Greek schools, 10-year-olds are not taught science as an individual subject, 40-41 : 11 8. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy Activitiestherefore the developed activities may become an introductory course in science conceptsand phenomena focusing on weather phenomena such as the circle of water, rain, snow, hail,wind. Science concepts and phenomena about weather and water (that is part of mostweather phenomena) may become a multi-level platform of introducing pupils to thescientific way of thinking. The water as a matter of fact, being the basic element of weatherphenomena lies in many childrens games and constitutes one of the first childrensexplorations trying to comprehend nature around them (Harlen & Elstgeest, 1993;Papadopoulos & Seroglou, 2007, 2009). The challenge for the developed course has beenactually to motivate pupils to participate in theatre techniques, as this includes exposure ofspeaking, debating, acting styles with pupils having no previous training. The biggest problemhas been creating a role-play that is at the same time both interesting and educational, sothat pupils will be in the mood to enrol and also have the opportunity to learn about science.Our main intention besides learning science concepts has been the evolvement ofcommunication skills, which may allow students to participate in public debates andargumentations. Before performing the actual role-play, students are first introduced tophysics concepts, via internet, books, and experiments. Scientific, historical and social factsare discussed and elaborated in detail preparing students to participate in the setting andconflict of the role-play. In order to achieve these objectives the following elements need tobe present: a conflict, a setting and the set of roles. The conflict has to do with a problem thatneeds to be defined, discussed and if possible resolved. Its better to choose a conflict thatconcerns the childrens interests and is meaningful to them. The setting is the place in whichthe conflict takes place. The set of roles are the characters of people participating in theconflict. In our case, the conflict concerns a debate about weather phenomena, the setting isa citizens gathering and the roles are children, adults and scientists. Additionally students aremotivated by the following questions that concern the subject to be discussed: What dopeople know through media, science, history and everyday life about weather phenomena?What do people value as important concerning ethics and the real world? How do peoplebehave either as individuals or as members of an organized society? This introductory (traditional) part has four-hour duration and in this time students arebeing informed about: a) weather phenomena, b) the scientific way of studying and recordingweather phenomena and c) what people do or believe about weather phenomena throughtime. We also bring forward myths, legends and traditions of the past that accompanyweather phenomena through time in a variety of cultures. Eventually pupils form threedifferent role-groups: scientists, adults and children. The groups are introduced to ways toseek and approach additional information (newspapers, books, internet, media etc.) and aregiven directions on how to prepare their arguments in order to participate in the debate.Each group represents different interpretations about weather phenomena and nature ingeneral.Scenario and roles In the developed role-play, there are three different groups of people carrying differentbeliefs and debating about a) weather phenomena and b) the relative motion of earth, moonand sun concerning the change of seasons and day-night transition. Each team articulatesarguments, attempts to convince while a fruitful dialogue is set. The group of scientists seeksto inform both children and adults about the world around them and is willing to givescientific explanations and to introduce children and adults to the scientific way of observing,thinking and researching. The group of children is always full of questions. Children seekanswers and explanations and are prompt to hear, believe and accept scientific explanations.During the developed role-play pupils form questions like the following: How are cloudscreated? Why do clouds move and change forms? Why clouds dont fall? Can we touch therainbow? The group of adults carries the perception that they know everything. Adults 12 : 40-41 9. Papadopoulos & Seroglousupport that they dont have to listen to scientific explanations while for them it is clear thatchildren worry too much. Adults claim that they already have a lot of information aboutnature and weather phenomena coming from our ancestors or even God (!). They say:Weather phenomena are arranged by God the eclipse of the sun always brings somethingvillain in the world, it is a warning the sun circles around earth. During the application ofthe role-play, pupils have evolved their communicational skills carrying out their roles.Debate in this context provides pupils with opportunities to explore a range of ideas (otherthan their own) and also introduces them to a variety of values and interpretationsconcerning the nature of science.Activated skills and attitudesPupils debate has been recorded and analyzed using the 3D-5I analysis matrix. The eightsubcategories of the 3D-5I model have been represented with thirty five segmental skills andattitudes and the recorded debate has been scanned and studied in this context, providingtwenty-nine actually active skills and attitudes (that is a percentage of 82,8%). In Table 3,activated skills and attitudes recorded in 500 seconds debate are presented.Number of activated skills and attitudes recorded in 500 seconds debate Time Session2 3 456 (in seconds)participantsparticipantsparticipants participants participants2531 0 00050 070 00075 0 072001000 070001250 053001500 0 00125175 22 0 0002000 06600225044 0002500 08100275063 0003000 0 00 82325027 000350 35 0 000375042 0004000 06700425 50 0 0004500 0 0 830475027 000500039 000Table 3. Number of activated skills and attitudes recorded in 500 seconds debate. In Table 3, for sessions of 25 seconds duration the activated skills and attitudes havebeen counted and also the number of participating students is given. The skills and attitudesactivated correspond to the subcategories of the 3D-5I model (as presented in Tables 1 and2). Nevertheless, the percentages of activated skills and attitudes recorded in 500 seconds 40-41 : 13 10. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy Activitiesdebate are presented in detail in Figure 2 where each sub-category of dimensions andintelligences is presented by its code-name.Figure 2. Percentages of activated skills and attitudes recorded in 500 seconds debateThe six non-activated segmental skills and attitudes (corresponding to the 3D-5Isubcategories) are: a) problem solving, b) acceptance of diversity, c) using body-gesturesymbols, d) ability to observe carefully and then recreate scenes in detail (imitate), e) senseof room-orientation, f) mental perception and representation. The average mean of therecorded segmental skills and attitudes is 3,2%. The lowest percentage has been the one for 14 : 40-41 11. Papadopoulos & Seroglouthe segmental skill of learning and thinking through observation & experiment (0,1%) and thehighest ones (7%) have been involvement in learning, and almost 6%: positive classroomclimate, self-control, participation through peer-group, acting skills, creative fantasy.Participation in the debateThe videotaped debate has been divided in time sessions of 25 seconds each for betteranalysis and inquiry. The average participation in these sessions has been three or four pupils.The minimum participation in the argumentation has been two pupils and the maximumparticipation has been six pupils (see Figure 3).Figure 3. Number of participants and activated skills and attitudes in 500 seconds debate The peak of the debate appears in 150-175 seconds time session, and this is becausepupils deal with a question which concerns the rainbow and most students have both theexperience and the necessary vocabulary to comment on it. All the children have beencapable of expressing their ideas about the rainbow either as a scientist or a child or an adult(depending on the group they belong) and to participate in the developing dialogue. In thesame time session (150-175 seconds) there has been a substantial summit of segmental skillsand attitudes: 125 segmental skills and attitudes are recorded by all the pupils compared withan average of 56 for every time session, as the recorded skills and attitudes have to do withthe participation of each child. Results show that greater pupils participation is recordedwhenever an intense disagreement rises during the debate since everybody wants to expressan opinion. For example, in 450-475 seconds time session four pupils and one teacherparticipate actively in the discussion and this has been initiated by one of the scientistssupporting that: no one can reach the sun, because its too hot and can melt everything thattries to approach it. The discussion comes to a peak when a pupil-scientist expresses thatthe explosions that occur on the surface of the sun are the reason for this enormously hightemperature on the sun while pupils-adults express that scientists do not know what is 40-41 : 15 12. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy Activitieshappening there. This provokes the pupils-scientists to strongly support that scientists doknow a lot of things about the sun from the data they get from satellites and scientificinstruments. However, less pupils participation has been recorded (two pupils per timesession), whenever extensive and difficult answers have been required to questions such as:How hail and rain are created? Why the sun appears in one place in the horizon and thenmoves to another place on the sky? Pupils participation in the debate presents a variation depending on the personalityand the activated skills of each pupil. The teacher has not intervened at all in the discussionso as the pupils themselves would evolve the necessary skills to overcome the obstacles theyface opening their way towards their socialization and productive argumentation for theclassroom but mostly for their life as citizens in a society. As pupils become more familiarwith argumentation techniques in the classroom, a more balanced participation of each pupilappears in the discussion despite some individual differences. Teachers participation hasbeen only 0,8% (Figure 4). The teacher facilitates assists and encourages the pupils to becomemore active in participating in the discussion and more accurate in their argumentationhelping them to shift from nave to elaborated and focused arguments. Figure 4. Participation in the debate of weather phenomena in percent The average participation has been 7%. Figure 4 shows that there have been five pupilsabove that average. However, most pupils present a lower participation. For 14 participantsgiving a total 100% of active discussion incidents, an average of 7% per participant reveals ademocratically shared discussion concerning time and argumentation. There has also been apupil from another country, who has not participated in the debate at all because he didntspeak Greek yet since he had come to Greece only a few months ago. During the debate heobserved the discussion and followed the emotional flow of the argumentation followingpupils body language that revealed moments of agreement, disagreement, awkwardness, 16 : 40-41 13. Papadopoulos & Seroglousilence etc. This pupil managed to participate in the debates that followed the one presentedin this paper and to express his opinions and thoughts.The 3D-5I analysis matrixThe analysis of data using the 3D-5I analysis matrix provides a fruitful background fordiscussion on the results of this application. A snapshot of the debate on the 3D-5I analysismatrix is presented in Figure 5. Figure 5. The 3D-5I analysis matrixData analysis, shows that debate through role-playing, has significant results both onthe three dimensions of learning and on the five chosen types of Gardners MultipleIntelligences. The comparative analysis of data recorded regarding the activated segmentalskills, abilities and attitudes that lie on the cognitive, meta-cognitive and emotionaldimension of teaching and learning science has shown a simultaneous activation of skills,abilities and attitudes that correspond to the types of intelligence of the 3D-5I model. Inparticular, when pupils activate skills and attitudes of the cognitive dimension (c1 and c3),they also activate skills and attitudes that lie on linguistic intelligence (l1, l3 and l4) andinterpersonal intelligence (p1 and p2). This happens for example as the pupils who haveimpersonated the role of children ask: How does rain happen? And the children who haveacted as scientists respond activating skills and attitudes of the linguistic intelligence in orderto deal with science content (c3) and indicate stimulated knowledge retaining (l4): Rainhappens due to the sun because it evaporates water from the sea and goes high formingclouds. When these clouds get colder, rain happens. Pupils in their attempt to deal withscience content (c1) and scientific terminology (l3) employ social and communication skills(p1). Data show that the activation of meta-cognitive skills and attitudes is usually followedby the activation of linguistic, intrapersonal, bodily-kinesthetic and spatial skills. In our casethe activation of m1, m2, m3 and m4 meta-cognitive skills has a strong effect on:a) the increased narrative comprehension and production (l1), the use of unfamiliarscientific vocabulary (l3) and a greater knowledge retaining (l4) concerning linguisticintelligence,b) the expression of feelings (i1), self-esteem and self-awareness (i2), self-control (i3),decision making (i4) and increasing independence (i5) concerning intrapersonal, 40-41 : 17 14. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy Activities c) acting skills (b2) concerning bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, d) creative fantasy (s2) concerning spatial intelligence. Role playing, argumentation and debating set the background for pupils to discuss onthe way scientific ideas change through time and interact with the social and cultural contextthat supports them. Role playing and argumentation provide pupils a forum to express theiridentity in the non-stopping interference of information flow from modern life thatdisorientate rather than help communication. Conflicting points of view are brought forwardand pupils present their opinions and reconsider their beliefs about the nature of science(nature of the content and the methodology of science, dogmatism and science, evolution ofscience). Science-society interactions puzzle pupils and make them reflect on the ethical,cultural, democratic and utilitarian aspects of those interactions. Pupils are encouraged toactivate argumentation and causality skills coupled with linguistic segmental abilities in orderto communicate using scientific content and terminology to support their arguments.Nevertheless, in order to compose their questions and search for cause-effect interactions,pupils take discussion in their own hands and activate intrapersonal intelligence skills andattitudes (self-esteem and self awareness, self control, decision making and decision making).Pupils also use kinesthetic intelligence skills (acting skills) in order to express thecharacteristics of the role they are performing, as well as they put forward their creativefantasy to help them go beyond the borders of traditional courses and create in their mind animage and a psychological environment that encourages meta-cognitive skills and attitudes.For example, pupils that play the role of scientists say to the whole group: You think that youknow everything but you dont know how to explain phenomena. You just say what youimagine that happens. Well, science has moved forward And they go on with self-confidence and effective vocabulary as they explain about night and day on the planet: Asthe Earth moves around itself, some areas have light and we say it is day-time there. Otherareas dont have light and we say it is night. As the Earth turns again the places that used tobe in the dark now come in the light and it is day-time. The other places that used to be in thelight now are in the dark and it is night. The study of the activation of segmental skills and abilities (e1,e2,e3 and e4) of theemotional dimension of science teaching and learning reports the parallel activation ofsegmental skills and attitudes of intrapersonal (i1,i2,i3,i4,i5,), interpersonal (p1,p2,p4) andlinguistic (l1,l2,l3,l4) intelligences. As pupils get engaged to the learning proceduresencouraged through debating and as they feel part of a meaningful for them activity, theirmotives and interest multiply in the context of the argumentation role-play. Nevertheless,they exercise in decision making, attitude adjustment supporting co-operation and self-esteem balance. While being enthusiastic about this theatre informed teaching practice,pupils appear far more interested in learning science, in understanding the nature of scienceand in expressing themselves in a variety of styles activating segmental linguistic skills. In theend of this course pupils express their joy and satisfaction as they say: Today the course hasbeen completely different! We had fun, we quarreled and argued and we actually learned! In both cases, data analysis shows that the developed debate for teaching scienceencourages the development of skills that affect learning of science but also have an effect onpupils learning potential beyond science, providing a variety of learning situations promotingscientific literacy and the development of key-skills vital for pupils personal and socialdevelopment (Seroglou, 2006). 18 : 40-41 15. Papadopoulos & Seroglou Figure 6. Percentages learning dimensions and multiple intelligences output during thedebateThe above bar-graph (Figure 6) shows clearly that interpersonal and intrapersonalintelligence, as well as the emotional dimension of learning display the higher percentages(18%) during the debate verifying that the symbolic dramatic-pretend play through role-playscan be seen as a manifestation of interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence (Guss, 2005).During the debate, pupils have been encouraged to make decisions, to adjust their behaviourin order to co-operate with the rest and to strengthen their self-esteem and self-confidence.The high results of interpersonal intelligence are due to the dynamics of multiple socialinteractions that role-play offers. During the activity, pupils appear supported and protectedenough in order to participate in meaningful science learning in a non-expert friendly learningenvironment. Looking closely to the results concerning the emotional dimension of teachingand learning science, all pupils appear interested and highly motivated to participate andexpressed their positive attitude towards science and their will to understand ways ofthinking in the context of science. Nevertheless, the fact that their work and study in scienceappears meaningful encourages them to explore a variety of values and attitudes differentthan their own in the environment of the developed debate that welcomes diversity ofopinions. A large part of this improvement has undoubtedly been due to pupils enthusiasmabout the teaching innovation and the new active learning materials used.The recorded percentage of 13% for the cognitive dimension of teaching and learningscience indicates that most pupils successfully approach the science content following avariety of learning situations coming from the fruitful background of the applied role-play.Pupils appear more attentive and provide verbal and written responses that indicateknowledge acquisition and a deeper level of understanding the science concepts.The 12% output concerning the meta-cognitive dimension of teaching and learningscience reflects pupils synthesis of ideas in order to question, explain and reason, as well astheir wonder about causality styles, relations and effects. It seems that role-playing developsa capacity for metacognition, the ability to think about the ways one thinks (Weinert et al.,1987). It offers a more positive vehicle for dealing with the disorientation of modern life 40-41 : 19 16. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy Activitiesbecause it teaches pupils skills for participating in the creation of their own unfoldingidentities. Furthermore, pupils reflect on the nature of science and during their discussions inthe role-play, they consider and reconsider the nature of the science content, the scientificmethodology, the dilemma whether scientific knowledge is a form of absolute truth or ahuman construct that evolves and changes in time.Linguistic intelligence has been activated at a percentage of 9% as there has beenrecorded a double aspect of language development: narrative comprehension and narrativeproduction. We explicitly support that the activation of imagination during role-playenhances the development of both narrative comprehension and narrative production. Pupilsneed opportunities to practice their oral language skills and role-playing is a medium thatprovides a wealth of these opportunities (Gremin et al., 2006). It provides a context in whichdebate on weather phenomena helps pupils acquire meaning of scientific de-contextualizedlanguage and affects narrative development because it provides the necessary background tofacilitate pupils ability to construct mental images of a story that seams true and realitycompatible to people around them.Results concerning the bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence (6%) indicate the interrelationbetween body language and acting techniques (Gardner, 1993). Creative fantasy, a basic skillof spatial intelligence (6%), has also been activated through the use of role play.Data analysis has pointed out the activation of cognitive skills, meta-cognitive skills(including nature-of-science aspects) and attitudes as well as multiple intelligences during thisdebate performed by 10-year-old pupils (8 minutes duration of the role-play).Data analysis in the 3D framework of teaching and learning scienceConcerning the analysis of data in the context of the three-dimensional framework ofteaching and learning science results show: a) In the cognitive dimension, pupils successfully discuss about science content in avariety of contexts and activate observation and experimentation skills. b) In the meta-cognitive dimension, pupils reflect on the nature of science in theirdiscussions. They reconsider the nature of the content and of the methodology of science.Pupils especially focus on the dilemma whether scientific knowledge is a form of absolutetruth or a human construct that evolves and changes in time. c) In the emotional dimension, all students are interested and highly motivated toparticipate and express a positive attitude towards science.Figure 7. Developed learning dimensions through time 20 : 40-41 17. Papadopoulos & Seroglou In figure 7 the flow in time of the activated dimensions of learning and teaching scienceis presented. The vertical axis of figure 7 represents the number of reported cases ofactivated skills. The horizontal axis represents the 500 seconds of the debate. Lines in thediagram represent the flow and evolution during the debate of the activated skills and threedifferent lines show the evolution of skills and attitudes concerning the cognitive dimension,the meta-cognitive dimension and the emotional dimension. Diagram 7 shows that thecognitive and the emotional dimension are synchronized and their lines move in parallel(Figure 7). Both peaks of cognitive and emotional dimensions appear at 150 seconds timesession when the greatest pupils participation has been observed. During most of the debatethe meta-cognitive dimension displays parallel but in a lower rate results with the cognitiveand emotional dimension. The meta-cognitive peaks appear at different time session than thecognitive and emotional peaks. The only simultaneous peak display in all three dimensionshas been recorded at 450 seconds (Figure 7). At 450 seconds five pupils participate in thedebate. Two pupils play the role of adults and three pupils play the role of scientists. Thesetwo groups present the greatest meta-cognitive results perhaps due to the nature of theirroles. The analysis of the videotaped debate indicates that meta-cognitive skills and attitudesrecorded are activated due to: a) the kind of roles pupils impersonate, b) the subjectdiscussed and c) the verbal release coupled with a liberation of emotions that lead tospontaneous and intuitive behavior and trigger pupils sincere straight speech beyond thelimitations usually present as a result of teachers expectations and classroom structure.Pupils during the debate make a first step away from classroom formality: they stopexpressing in their words what the teacher wants to hear and instead they strongly supportwhat they believe or what they interpret through their role bringing forward a number ofsocial stereotypes. An important part of the meta-cognitive dimension is the nature of science although(Driver et al., 1996; Lederman et al., 2002; Simonneaux, 2001) and in our case pupils in thetime session between 50 seconds and 450 seconds join a conflict between scientists andadults and discuss about the limits of science defined by the values of scientific research andobservation. Pupils comments show their reflection on nature of science and on the waythey learn science. A pupil supports that: Through this discussion we learned in a better wayissues that we thought we knew well... Another pupil says: Adults cannot explain a lot ofthings about the weather. They give explanations using their imagination, while science hasadvanced more and more nowadays. Finally, a girl who plays the role of a scientist replies toher fellow-pupils that science cant explain everything in an attempt to confront a lot ofchildrens questions during the debate, bringing forward a key-issue concerning the nature ofscience: scientists put questions and search for answers creating new questions and this wayscience evolves. The segmental skills of the cognitive dimension that display the greatest percentagesduring the debate are c1 - involvement in learning (7%) and c3 - content management(5,90%) (Average mean 3,20%). There is substantial evidence that pupils have been fullyengaged and actively involved in the learning experience as they appear more attentive andprovide verbal and written responses that indicate greater interest in the science content anda deeper level of understanding the science concepts. The segmental skills of the meta-cognitive dimension display lower or almost equal percentages compared with the averagemean of 3,20%. Despite pupils age (10 years old) and the way Greek curriculum is organizedoffering only a few opportunities to the pupils to discuss and reflect on, the developed role-play provided pupils with the opportunity to discuss on nature of science aspects. Thepercentages of segmental skills recorded are m1 - reconsidering the interrelations of scienceand society (4,40%), m2 - reflecting on nature of science (2%), m3 - argumentation (3,40%)and m4 - causality (2,20%). Students synthesized their ideas in order to question, explain andreason, while they wonder about causality styles, relations and effects. Role-play makes a 40-41 : 21 18. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy Activitiesvaluable contribution to the pupils understanding of the nature of science. In particular,there has been recorded a significant move towards an appreciation of the interactive natureof experiment and theory. Pupils have a lot of opportunities to develop their knowledge andunderstanding of the ways in which scientific ideas change through time and how the natureof these ideas and their use in society are affected by the social, moral, spiritual and culturalcontexts in which they are developed (Solomon, et al. 1992).Results concerning the emotional dimension of science teaching are presented inFigure 8 that follows. Results appear significantly high for all students, during the role-play.The total percentage of activated skills and attitudes concerning the emotional dimensionrecorded has been 18%. These results meet with the similar percentage of interpersonal andintrapersonal intelligences activated (18%), both intelligences defined as a whole emotionalintelligence by Coleman (Coleman, 1995). There are many skills, attitudes and faculties thatshare in common the emotional dimension of science teaching and the emotionalintelligence. They consist of knowledge achieved through human interaction and their mainfeatures are communication, socializing and sharing of emotions. Role-playing encouragespupils to experience a variety of feelings opening the way towards mature co-operationbehavior and community ideals instead of individual strangle and unhealthy antagonism. Thesegmental skills and attitudes displayed higher percentages, than the average mean (3,20%).Pupils feel that their work is meaningful (5,90%), interact in a positive classroom climate (6%)and present increased interest in and motivation about learning science (5,90%). Figure 8. Segmental skills and attitudes concerning the emotional dimension of science teaching during the debate on weather phenomena. However, pupils show low results on exploring attitudes and values other than theirown (0,20%) as the issues discussed during the role-play did not offer the background ofexpressing innovation, nondiscrimination and tolerance to the difference that would confirmthe activation of attitudes and values exploration. Nevertheless, children consider this role-play classroom activity as a game that they enjoy playing. This role play has been fun! andthis fact lies in conflict with the image of serious, difficult and boring science courses thatpupils carry. Therefore, it has been hard for pupils to realize that the role-play activity hasactually been a science lesson. Also, strong emotional relationships have sprung out of thegroups, between members of the same or different groups. Pupils argue, disagree, shout, testthe limits of their ideas and perceptions and challenge each other beyond the lines oftraditional politically correct but sterilized classroom discussion. Debate creates both forpupils and their teacher a bridge between school world and real life. 22 : 40-41 19. Papadopoulos & SeroglouFigure 9. Multiple intelligences flow charts for the debate on weather phenomena 40-41 : 23 20. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy ActivitiesData analysis in the multiple intelligences frameworkResults coming from data analysis in the framework of multiple intelligences show expressiveand interactive linguistic skills activated (e.g. creative fantasy, assumption, prediction,reasoning and self-evaluation). There has also been substantial evidence that pupilsinterpersonal, intrapersonal, bodily-kinaesthetic and spatial intelligences have beenencouraged. The flow of multiple intelligences during the debate about weather phenomenareveals a parallel progress (although at different levels) of all intelligences except thelinguistic one that shows much lower results in 325 seconds time session due to the shortanswer that pupils give during the debate (see Figure 9 that follows). Intrapersonal andinterpersonal intelligences display the highest appearance in pupils discussion. During mostof the role-play an average of 5 or 6 recorded events per time session show the activation ofintrapersonal and interpersonal intelligences.Linguistic intelligence follows a similar rhythm to the first two but has an average of 3recorded events per time session in pupils discussion. Spatial and kinaesthetic intelligencehave the lowest levels of appearance during the debate having an average of 2 recordedevents per time session. At 150 seconds, where all intelligences show a peak, the teacher andsix pupils participate in a vivid discussion that provides a treasure of events revealingactivated intelligences. At 175 seconds a bend in the flow of recorded intelligences appears asduring this session the teacher stops the flow of the discussion in order to give someguidelines to the pupils.Role-playing allows pupils to exercise and develop skills necessary for active citizenshipin a safe, non-threatening environment and to use a wide range of ideas and scientificvocabulary. This adds up to the idea that being exposed to a flow of language is not nearlyas important as using it in the midst of doing (Bruner, 1990). Findings concerning linguisticintelligence indicate that there has been an effective communication and use of language(9%). As pupils improvise, they think, feel, visualize and create multiple ways to express theirideas. They are also able to make their thinking visible as they shape their understanding. Inaddition the social and scientific framework of the debate encourages pupils to use a morelucid language because they realize that this is a promising way to communicate theirintentions (Mages, 2006).Results concerning intrapersonal intelligence appear an interesting high percentage of18%. Pupils discuss in touch with own feelings, values and ideas activating their capacity tounderstand themselves, to appreciate their feelings, fears and motivations. Pupils areencouraged in the context of the developed debate to make decisions, to adjust theirbehavior within the group, while in the same time they strengthen their self-esteem and self-confidence. Moreover, acting skills required during the debate mobilize intrapersonal andinterpersonal intelligences and bring forward a wide range of expressed emotions(Warrington & Younger, 2006).In Figure 10 the activated segmental skills of intrapersonal intelligence are displayed.Pupils present self-control (5,80%), boost their self-esteem and self-awareness (5,50%),perform with an increasing independence (4,60%), express their feelings (1,70%) and makedecisions (0,40%). Results show the dynamics of role-play in the sense of belonging in a team,in undertaking responsibilities, in concentrating on classroom activities and finally in thedevelopment of self-control. During the application of the debate, self-control has to do withthe way pupils handle their emotions in order to communicate and respond with efficiency tothe requirements of the activity. Self-control has been developed through pupilsperformances. Pupils have been willing and brave enough to participate in the debate andexpress their conflicting points of view. Self-consciousness increases through performingvarious behavioral styles and profiles while the understanding of others increases throughthe understanding of individual skills and characteristics (Gardner, 1994). 24 : 40-41 21. Papadopoulos & SeroglouFigure 10. Segmental skills and attitudes concerning the Intrapersonal intelligence during the debate on weather phenomena. During role-playing, pupils face two kinds of interaction: one among themselves andanother between pupils and the teacher. Results concerning the interpersonal intelligenceare presented in Figure 11. Interpersonal intelligence includes the capacity to understand theintentions, motivations and desires of other people. It allows people to work effectivelytogether. The interpersonal theories support that social interaction is thought to constitutethe mechanism of change (Mages, 2006). Interpersonal intelligence consists of threesegmental skills and attitudes which are essential in academic success, career effectivenessand personal well-being (Low & Nelson, 2005).Figure 11. Segmental skills and attitudes concerning the Interpersonal intelligence during the debate on weather phenomena. 40-41 : 25 22. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy ActivitiesResults show 6% social and communication skills activated, 6% participation throughpeer groups encouraged and 6% sharing and working in groups taking place. All these equallyadd up to 18% of interpersonal intelligence activated during the debate. The successfulinteraction during the debate allows pupils to develop skills and attitudes such as workingcollaboratively, sharing, listening and responding, compromising and reaching decisions. Theapplied conversation and argumentation allows pupils to behave wisely and effectively asthey deal with strong emotions, time management and goal achievement. This process issocial, reality related and functional within the pupils emotional world (Davis, 2000;Vygotsky, 1978).Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence has been activated at a total percentage of 6% duringthe debate. Acting skills have been the only recorded skills concerning the bodily-kinesthetic intelligence (6% - see previously in Figure 2). Skills concerning body-gesturesymbols, acting and the ability to observe carefully and then recreate scenes in detail(imitate) havent been recorded due to the nature of the debate: students discuss aboutweather phenomena in a round table, they do not stand up, perform or act using thetheatrical body language. Pupils with high self-consciousness and strong ego during thisprocedure exercise on controlling their personal expectations and shaping theirunderstanding and expression of the expectations of the role they play, although in manycases this lies in conflict with their beliefs. This has been very difficult particularly for thosepupils playing the role of adults. Pupils are actors and spectators at the same time (Boal,2007). As they are under their teammates critic, they have to become better performers as ifthey were addressing to an audience.Spatial intelligence displayed a total percentage of 6% concerning the one segmentalskill of creative fantasy that has been recorded during the debate on weather phenomena.Its importance is equal to the importance of linguistic intelligence because together theyform the two main information recourses. Debate functioning as brainstorming results in acreative game, where the participants have been asking for detailed information,clarifications and explanations and in the same time they have been expressing their point ofview. This has led to a flexibility of thoughtfulness as every pupil fulfills the attitude toexamine a great variety of explanations and ideas concerning science. Pupils present originalquestions and thoughts, improbable combinations of images, perceptions and arguments.Many elements of weather phenomena have been discussed and clarified (snow, rain, hail,wind, sun, moon, sky, etc.). These expressed cognitive representations make pupils receptorsof multiple visual stimulations which result in the evolvement of visual concepts. Thisprocedure adds up to pupils thinking as pupils in those ages think using mental images. Thereare cases when the term itself doesnt mean anything for a pupil while the recall of a familiarvisual stimulation plays a significant role. Nevertheless children with presenting an importantactivation of spatial intelligence seem to learn better and organize their knowledge throughimages and figures.Discussion and further perspectivesThe 3D-5I research model that puts together the cognitive, meta-cognitive and emotionaldimensions of science teaching with five intelligences when used as an analysis matrix offersto classroom interactions a new dynamic perspective to study pupils argumentation. Ourexperience from the applied role-play indicates that the combined frameworks provideresearchers with the potential to mark, classify, sort out, and evaluate the recorded skills andattitudes concerning scientific literacy that pupils present during applied activities.Additionally the 3D-5I research model may become a powerful tool for analyzing responsesthat have not directly been connected to disciplinary fields and especially to describe morefully what have often simply been referred to as values underlying arguments and decisionmaking. 26 : 40-41 23. Papadopoulos & SeroglouIn this paper, the comparative analysis of data recorded provided snapshots of theapplied role-play that translate pupils actions into activated skills and attitudes to beevaluated. Role-playing creates a dynamic background for widening experiences and a wayfor educating future citizens to become sensitive, aware and mature. Role-playing teachesscience in a more holistic multi-faceted way, while scientific ideas become more accessible,understandable, memorable and exciting. Pupils positive attitude towards role-play showsthat this can be a fruitful and friendly teaching strategy, helping pupils to stop expectingscience to be a difficult task. Regarding the activated segmental skills, abilities and attitudesthat lie on the cognitive, meta-cognitive and emotional dimension of teaching and learningscience, the 3D-5I analysis has shown a simultaneous activation of skills, abilities andattitudes that correspond to the five types of intelligences. For example, when pupils activateskills and attitudes of the cognitive dimension, they also activate skills and attitudes that lieon linguistic intelligence and interpersonal intelligence. Nevertheless, the activation of meta-cognitive skills and attitudes appears usually followed by the activation of linguistic,intrapersonal, bodily-kinesthetic and spatial skills. Finally, the activation of segmental skillsand abilities of the emotional dimension reports the parallel activation of segmental skills andattitudes of intrapersonal, interpersonal and linguistic intelligences.The 3D-5 I research model is an example of analysis matrixes that can be developed inorder to monitor classroom data concerning the shift from traditional teaching to teaching inthe context of scientific literacy. Such an analysis matrix brings forward the skills andattitudes encouraged during a teaching activity offering valuable information both for scienceteaching and for teacher-training. Nevertheless, new methodological approaches used inorder to achieve teaching science for all can be evaluated while target skills developed in theclassroom and the ways in which pupils are expected to learn can be reassessed in thecontext of analysis frameworks like the 3D-5I research model that we have developed andused.ReferencesBentley, M. (2000). Improvisational Drama and the Nature of Science. Journal of science Teacher Education, 1, 63-75.Bybee, R. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy, Heinemann, Portsmouth.Bybee, R. (1999). Toward an understanding of scientific literacy. In Advancing standards for science and mathematics education: Views from the field. AAAS, Washington DC.Boal, A. (2006). The Rainbow of Desire, Routledge, New York.Boal, A. (2007). Games for actors and non-actors, Routledge, New York.Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.Coleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence. Why It Can Matter More than IQ. New York: Bantam Books.Coleman, D. (2006). Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationships New York: BantamDansky, J. L. (1980). Cognitive consequences of sociodramatic play and exploration training for economically disadvantaged preschoolers, Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines, 21(1), 47-58.Davis, D. (2000).Howard Gardner: knowledge, learning and development in drama and arts education, Research in Drama Education, 5(2),Dewey, J. (1934/1997). Experience and Education. New York: Simon and Schuster.Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R. & Scott, P. (1996). Young Peoples Images of Science, Open University Press. 40-41 : 27 24. Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy ActivitiesFensham, P. (2002). Science for all. In J. Wallace & W. Louden (Eds), Dilemmas of science teaching: Perspectives on problems of practice. Routledge, Falmer. London.Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: the theory of multiple intelligences, Basic Books, New York.Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: the theory in practice, Basic Books, New York.Gardner, H. (1994). Creating Minds, Basic Books, New York.Gardner, H. (1997). Extraordinary minds, Basic Books, New York.Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed, Basic Books, New York.Gremin, T. & Goouch, K. & Blakemore, L. & Goff, E. & Macdonald, R. (2006). Connecting drama and writing: seizing the moment to write, Research in Drama Education, 11(3), 273-291Guss, G. (2005). Dramatic Playing Beyond the Theory of Multiple Intelligences, Research in Drama Education, 10(1).Harlen, W. & Elstgeest, J. (1993). UNESCO Sourcebook for Science in the Primary School, UNESCO.Hurd, P. (1997). Scientific literacy: New minds for a changing world. Science Education, 82, 407-416.Jenkins, E.W. (1990). Scientific literacy and school science education. School Science Review, 71, 43-51.Kjrnsli M. (2009). Finding New Goals PISA and TIMSS in light of Scientific Literacy,, J.B. (2001). Bringing art into the elementary school. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Kofoed, M. (2006). The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs: role play and students interest in physics. Physics Education, 41, 502-507.Laugksch, R. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84, 71-94.Lelederman, N.G., Abd-El-Khalick F., Bell R.L. and Schwartz R.S. (2002). Views of Nature of Science Questionnaire: Toward Valid and Meaningful Assessment of Learners Conceptions of nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497- 521Low, G. & Nelson, D. (2005). Emotional Intelligence: The Role of Transformative Learning in Academic Excellence. An article published in the Texas study magazine for Secondary EducationMages, W. (2006). Drama and imagination: a cognitive theory of dramas effect on narrative comprehension and narrative production, Research in Drama Education, 11(3), 329- 340Matthews, M. (1994). Science Teaching: The Role of History and Philosophy of Science, Routledge, London.McSharry, G., and Jones, S. (2000). Role-play in science teaching and learning, School Science Review, 82(298).Metalcafe, A. (1984). Teaching science through drama: An empirical investigation, Research in science & Technological Education Volume 2 Issue 1, 77-81Millar, J. (1983). Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus, 112(2), 29- 48.Papadopoulos, P. & Seroglou, F. (2007). A progressive sequence of theatre techniques for teaching science, Paper presented at the 9th International History, Philosophy and Science Teaching Conference, June 24-28, 2007, Calgary, Canada. 28 : 40-41 25. Papadopoulos & SeroglouPapadopoulos, P. & Seroglou, F. (2009). Developing Analysis Frameworks for Scientific Literacy Activities, Paper presented at the 10th International History, Philosophy and Science Teaching Conference, June 24-28, 2009, University of Notre Dame , USA.Papadopoulos, P. & Seroglou, F. (2011). Argumentation for metacognitive skill development in science teaching. In Seroglou, F., Koulountzos, V. & Siatras, A.(Eds.), Science and culture: Promise, challenge and demand - Proceedings of the 11th International IHPST and 6th Greek History, Philosophy and Science Teaching Joint Conference, 1-5 July 2011, Thessaloniki, Greece. Epikentro Publications, pp. 559-567.Papadopoulos, P. (2010). Theatrical practices in teaching science in elementary school.. PhD thesis. Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (in Greek).Piaget, J. (1951). Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. London : HeinemannSeroglou, F. & Koumaras, P. (2001). The Contribution of the History of Physics in Physics Education: A Review, Science & Education, 10(1-2), 153-172.Seroglou, F. (2006). Science for Citizenship, Epikentro Publications, Thessaloniki (in Greek).Seroglou, F., Dossis, S., Kanderakis, N., Koliopoulos, D., Koulountzos, V., Papadopoulos, P., Paraskevopoulou, E., Piliouras, P., Tsagliotis, N. & Vleioras, G. (2011). Developing and using evaluation research tools for science teaching cases informed by the history and philosophy of science. In Seroglou, F., Koulountzos, V. & Siatras, A.(Eds.), Science and culture: Promise, challenge and demand - Proceedings of the 11th International IHPST and 6th Greek History, Philosophy and Science Teaching Joint Conference, 1-5 July 2011, Thessaloniki, Greece. Epikentro Publications, pp. 687-676.Simonneaux, L. (2001). Role-Play or debate to promote students argumentation and justification on an issue in animal transgenesis. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 9, 903-927.Solomon J., Duveen J. & Scot L. (1992). Teaching about the nature of science through history: Action research in the classroom, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29 (4), 409- 421.Solomon, J. & Thomas, J. (1999). Science Education for the public: Understanding of Science. Studies in Education, 33.Solomon, J. (2001). Teaching for scientific literacy: What could it mean? School Science Review, 82, p.93-96Taylor, C. A. (1987). In Science education and information transfer, ed. Taylor, C. A. Ch. 1. Oxford: Pergamon (for ICSU Press).Tsarsiotou, Z. & Seroglou, F. ( 2011). Preparing an argumentation for teacher training in scientific literacy: The case of global warning. In Seroglou, F., Koulountzos, V. & Siatras, A.(Eds.), Science and culture: Promise, challenge and demand - Proceedings of the 11th International IHPST and 6th Greek History, Philosophy and Science Teaching Joint Conference, 1-5 July 2011, Thessaloniki, Greece. Epikentro Publications, pp. 735- 745.Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Warrington M., Younger M. (2006). Raising Boys Achievement in Primary Schools Towards an holistic approach Open University Press Berkshire England.Weinert, F. E. (1987). Introduction and overview: Metacognition and motivation as determinants of effective learning and understanding. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. 40-41 : 29