ABSTRACT
Teacher Sara Adjani was enthusiastic about the Thinking Together approach in general but was concerned about applying this to teaching science. The ground rules of Exploratory Talk, she pointed out, are all very well for discussing moral dilemmas where everyone may have a different view, but in science some conceptions are well established; children should be provided with access to our current understanding of how the world works. She had tried group work in science sessions and found that groups could talk together to share misconceptions. She described how a group working with a CD-ROM about animals attempted to answer the question, ‘What do frogs eat?’ At the end of the session, the children insisted that frogs eat grass. The group had discussed the question and been persuaded by the argument of Kieran who said that he kept a frog as a pet at home and that his frog definitely ate grass. Sara’s point was that it was her job as a teacher to ensure that the children understood that frogs eat insects, not grass. She thought that asking the children to discuss this factual point was almost bound to create problems because it offered an opportunity for persuasive children to spread their misunderstandings.
