This article provides a conceptual discussion of ‘ownership’ in various forms of participatory research. The discussion is grounded in our experiences from three research projects in science education. We seek to understand how and why ownership may be distributed between teachers and researchers at different stages in the research process. Looking at our projects in retrospect, we see that ownership was differently distributed at the initial stages. Then ownership distribution followed a similar pathway, as teachers gained ownership of implementation, whereas researchers reclaimed ownership of analyzing and disseminating the work. Our discussion departs from the idea that ownership relates to both ‘risks’ and ‘benefits’ as well as to both ‘rights and obligations. Thereby, we can make visible some of the circumstances that steer ownership towards the teachers or researchers. For example, we highlight that ownership distribution may be influenced by guidelines for research ethics and inequalities in terms of administrative support structures available to researchers and teachers. Based on our discussion, we suggest a number of questions to initiate and support a continuous dialogue between teachers and researchers who plan to engage in participatory research.

Teacher-researcher collaborations inevitably dissolve the border between who is teaching and who is researching, which in turn pushes discussions on research ethics as well as how to define, measure and ensure research validity. In an attempt to deepen the discussion on validity and ethical issues in teacher-research collaboration in science education research, this proposal seeks to disentangle how the notion of ‘ownership’ is transformed in various forms of teacher-researcher collaborations. The paper builds on data from three recent research projects in science education, representing different forms of teacher-researcher collaborations. The analysis focuses how the teachers’ and researchers’ ownership is played out in four stages of the research process; problem stating, design and implementation, analysis, and dissemination. The results indicate that ownership becomes actualised and altered in different ways, and at different stages, depending on the form of collaboration. A conclusion is that ownership needs to be accounted for in in all stages in the research process in order for science education research to accomplish deep relevance and justified implications. Since the question of ownership appears to be particularly troublesome in the last stages of the research process, a suggestion for future teacher-researcher collaboration is to plan for the project’s end, for example in terms of the participants’ anonymity and time to take part in analysis and dissemination of the results, already at the beginning.

Vad är naturvetenskap? Hur kommer naturvetenskaplig kunskap till? Hur säker är kunskapen? Varför gör man experiment? Påverkas den nya kunskapen av samhället forskarna befinner sig i? Kommer naturvetenskapen att kunna besvara alla frågor? Det här är frågor som har med naturvetenskapens karaktär att göra. Naturvetenskapens karaktär handlar alltså om vad naturvetenskap är, hur kunskapsprocessen ser ut och vad man kan säga om hur säker den naturvetenskapliga kunskapen är, i vilken utsträckning den är eller kan vara objektiv etc. Under den här workshopen beskriver vi naturvetenskap utifrån den här typen av perspektiv och hur dessa perspektiv relaterar till kursplanerna. Som deltagare får du också ta del av exempel på hur man kan arbeta med detta i NO-undervisningen.

The inclusion of Nature of Science (NOS) perspectives in science teaching (including broad and nuanced images of scientists) has been suggested as a way to emphasize citizen and social justice perspectives, and is therefore important for all students. However, so far there has been little research on how, and to what extent, NOS is communicated to students who are experiencing difficulties in the science classroom. This study focuses on how the images of scientists in science textbooks (school years 7–9) are altered in adjusted textbooks aimed at students in need of supplemental support. The adjustments between general textbooks and the adjusted books are analyzed and discussed in relation to a Social Justice perspective on science education. The results show that a number of different adjustments are made between general and adjusted versions of the books: (a) Remove an entire section, (b) Remove scientist from section, (c) Remove information about scientist (e.g., characteristics and/or activities), (d) Add scientist to section, and (e) Add or emphasize information about scientist (e.g., characteristics and/or activities). In different ways, these adjustments influence the images of scientists communicated to students in need of supplemental support. The consequences of these adjustments are discussed from a social justice perspective.

In the science education research field there is a large body of literature on the 'nature of science' (NOS). NOS captures issues about what characterizes the research process as well as the scientific knowledge. Here we, in line with a broad body of literature, use a wide definition of NOS including also e.g. socio-cultural aspects. It is argued that NOS issues, for a number of reasons, should be included in the teaching of science/physics. Research shows that NOS should be taught explicitly. There are plenty of suggestions on specific and separate NOS activities, but the necessity of discussing NOS issues in connection to specific science/physics content and to laboratory work, is also highlighted. In this article we draw on this body of literature on NOS and science teaching, and discuss how classroom situations in secondary physics classes could be turned into NOS-learning situations. The discussed situations have been suggested by secondary teachers, during in-service teacher training, as situations from every-day physics teaching, from which NOS could be highlighted.

Can contemporary science have a role in the classroom? While many students find contemporary science exciting, they often view school science as boring and uninteresting. Most of the physics taught in school was developed over a century ago and can be seen as well-established consensus science. Including discussions on contemporary research is one way to increase interest and motivation, and is also a way to provide students with possibilities to learn what research today could look like. It is also one way to teach general nature of science (NOS) perspectives, which have been argued to be important for many different reasons. In this presentation we will describe how a group of science teachers developed and implemented teaching sequences focusing on contemporary physics during in-service training. Each teacher chose a research area, interviewed a researcher, and wrote a popular science article aimed at secondary students (13-15 years old). Finally they designed, implemented and evaluated a teaching unit built around the popular science article. During the presentation we will describe the teachers’ experiences, the resources developed by them, and the kind of NOS perspectives included by the teachers.

Vikten av att behandla naturvetenskapernas karaktär (’NatureofSci-ence’, NOS) i NO-undervisningen har länge lyfts fram i dennv-didak-tiska forskningslitteraturen. NOS är också del av många länders kurs-planer, däribland de svenska. Dock saknas traditioner i skolan att ar-beta med området och det finns ett behov av både undervisnings-material och exempel på hur en sådan undervisning kan se ut. Nation-ellt resurscentrum för fysik har arbetat med flera forsknings-och ut-vecklingsprojekt med koppling till NOS. Ett sätt har varit att lärare, inom ramen för fortbildningskurser, har provat att undervisa NOS och dela sina erfarenheter med andra lärare. I den här artikeln berättar vi om olika sätt att arbeta med NOS och tipsar om resurser i form avundervisningsmaterial ochtexter som kan tjäna som inspiration för dig som lärare

This article focuses on the need for increased attention to content issues and working methods for science teaching in Early Childhood Education (ECE). Science education research emphasises the importance of not only focusing on specific phenomena, but also on the Nature of Science (NOS). NOS teaching deals with questions about what science is, how scientific knowledge is developed and in what ways humans are involved in these processes. An inclusion of such issues is important if common stereotypical images of science and scientists are to be challenged. Previous research has suggested that NOS can be taught through book talks connected to trade books. However, there is a lack of empirical studies at the ECE level supporting this suggestion. Thus, this article reports from the first part of a project in which researchers and teachers explored book talks as a possibility to introduce NOS in early years science (children between 1 and 5 years old). Data consists of book talks (N=48) around two picture trade books led by five preschool teachers preceded by a teacher-researcher workshop on NOS and NOS teaching. The results show that discussions on a variety of NOS issues is possible in an ECE context. These results are discussed in relation to previous literature on both NOS teaching and science in the early years.

We report from a project performed in collaboration between researchers and early childhood education (ECE) teachers. The idea of the project was to introduce ‘nature of science’ (NOS) in the ECE setting through using book-talks connected to trade books (narratives as well as expository books). Much research on NOS teaching has been done, but very scarcely targeting the youngest children. The empirical data in this project consists of audio recordings of book-talks (N=152) with children aged 2-6 led by five teachers, audio recordings of focus groups and workshops (N=9) with the teachers, documentation of children’s drawings as well as of artefacts used by the preschool teachers. The results show that discussions about a variety of NOS issues are possible in an ECE context. It also shows that attention can be directed towards NOS during book talks regardless of genre or if the books contain explicit NOS references or not. However, book-talks connected to books without explicit NOS references require that the teacher finds other ways to direct attention towards NOS.  The teachers involved in this project managed to do this with only a short introduction to NOS. This shows that book-talks has great potential as an approach to introducing NOS to the youngest children. The results further showed that the teachers experienced that the NOS book-talks had spin off-effects such as increased curiosity, new questions, and engagement in investigations among the children. These results point to the potential for NOS teaching to contribute to empowerment and agency for the children, and positions NOS as an important part of science in ECE that values democracy and social justice as central. Building on the results, we present a didactical model that can support teachers when introducing NOS to young children. 

The research field of science education has gathered questions about what science is, how scientific knowledge is developed and in what ways humans are involved in these processes under the umbrella concept ‘nature of science’ (NOS). Previous research has suggested that teaching ought to focus much more on these issues, but so far the focus has been on older children and students, while there is a lack of research on NOS teaching for the youngest children (up to six years). In this conceptual article,we suggest that NOS should be taught from the outset, and thus be part of science teaching in the early years. We put forward arguments as to why this early introduction coupled to the overall values and aims of democracy and social justice is important, and elaborate on the kind of NOS issues that could be included in science teaching aimed at the youngest children.

Science education research emphasizes the importance of not only focusing on specific phenomena in the teaching of science, but also on the Nature of Science (NOS). However NOS research has mostly focused on older students, and there is almost no NOS research focusing the preschool level. Research shows that stereotypical images are frequent, in school as well as in media, both concerning scientific knowledge and its processes and concerning researchers. As an example it is common that science is communicated as indisputable facts. This is part of the facts-tradition in school where scientific knowledge processes are often not mentioned. In a similar way a common image of the researcher is a white man, wearing lab coat and glasses, carrying a test tube. A pilot study (Hansson & Leden, 2016) on picture books for children, showed how this kind of stereotypical images of science and scientists often are strengthened, but sometimes also challenged in different ways. With a starting point in the results from the pilot study the aim of this presentation is to describe and discuss an upcoming study which will try out ways to use picture books to raise NOS issues in discussions between children and teachers in a preschool setting. This could mean highlighting issues such as How do we know this? What does the knowledge processes look like in science? Can knowledge change? What do a researcher do and what does he/she look like? Our assumption is that an inclusion of such issues in science teaching is important if common stereotypical images are to be challenged. Discussions about NOS in preschool could be a means to avoid reproducing the facts-tradition, and instead open up for more nuanced images of science and scientists, and thereby open up science for more children.

Tests convey messages about what to teach and how to assess. Bothof these dimensions may either broaden or become more uniformand narrow as a consequence of high-stakes testing. This studyaimed to investigate how Swedish science teachers wereinfluenced by national, high-stakes testing in science, specificallyfocusing on instances where teachers’ pedagogical practices werebroadened and/or narrowed. The research design is qualitativethematic analysis of focus group data, from group discussions withSwedish science teachers. The total sample consists of six teachers,who participated in 12 focus group discussion during threeconsecutive years. Findings suggest that the national testsinfluence teachers’ pedagogical practice by being used as asubstitute for the national curriculum. Since the teachers do notwant their students to fail the tests, they implement new contentthat is introduced by the tests and thereby broaden their existingpractice. However, when this new content is not seen as alegitimate part of teachers’ established teaching traditions, theinterpretation and implementation of this content may replicatethe operationalisations made by the test developers, even thoughthese operationalisations are restricted by demands forstandardisation and reliable scoring. Consequently, the testssimultaneously broaden and narrow teachers’ pedagogical practices.

The thesis explores teachers’ perspectives and negotiations on the role of “Nature of Science” (NOS) in compulsory school science teaching. Previous research has described school science teaching as having a strong focus on science concepts, and structured lab-work with an implicit focus on finding correct answers. In such teaching, there is little room for the individuals and contexts involved in the knowledge production. This description of science and science teaching is referred to as “black and white” in this thesis. Science Education research has proposed that by broadening the images of science, more students might identify with science and that desired scientific literacy outcomes could easier be achieved. One suggestion from Science Education research has been to include NOS in science teaching. Including NOS in everyday science teaching means that tensions are created in relation to already existing traditions. Here, teachers become an important factor as they are deeply entangled in the middle of policies, traditions, and discourses that surround science and school science. Methods used for exploring the teachers’ perspectives were: questionnaires, interviews, and focus group discussions. In particular, negotiations in the focus groups, over the three years, contributed to illuminating perspectives and tensions. A theoretical framework consisting of five comprehensive NOS themes was developed. This framework guided the contents of the focus groups as well as parts of the analyses. The thesis includes four articles, each with its own specific aim and research questions. The main results from these articles are summarized and discussed in relation to policies and traditions that surround science education. The results show that the NOS practice that the teachers constructed through their negotiations: a) aims for a broad rather than deep NOS understanding (i.e. including many NOS issues, but avoiding philosophical depth), b) is contextualized within lab-work practices or communicative activities, and c) aims to develop student engagement and reaching other curricular goals than learning science concepts. This construction of NOS practice results in strong tensions in relation to traditional science teaching, which means that teachers’ and students’ roles are challenged. However, NOS becomes a means in the work of expanding lab-work practice, as well as a catalyst in the formation of science teaching practice directed towards communication (e.g. reflections on science in relation to society, both from perspectives within and outside science). The resistance between NOS and the teaching of science concepts means that they become parts of different practices. As a consequence, students encounter different images of science that are seldom compared or negotiated. A suggestion for science education is to create structures for balancing or merging parallel practices as a way to ease tensions and expand the concepts-based practice.

Traditional science teaching often has a focus on ready-made facts. Including nature of science (NOS) in science teaching has been discussed as a way to broaden the images of science. However, there is a gap between research on NOS teaching and practice. As teachers are important keys to what takes place in the classroom this study has focused on their perspectives and ways of making meaning of NOS as an element of science teaching. Six science teachers took part in a longitudinal study on NOS and NOS teaching that spanned three years. The data consists of questionnaires, interviews, classroom observations, and focus-group discussions. The main data source is the recorded and transcribed focus-group discussions from all three years (N=12). A qualitative content analysis was performed and teachers’ perspectives were interpreted through the theoretical frameworks of scientific literacy and science teaching traditions. The results show that teachers talked about NOS teaching as something new that differed from their traditional teaching of “facts and lab-work”. However, they often welcomed NOS teaching as a way to challenge stereotypical, black-and-white images of science, as well as a means to reach overarching goals of science education such as developing students’ abilities for critical thinking.

Nature of science (NOS) has for a long time, and for a number of reasons been regarded a key ingredient in the teaching for scientific literacy. Much has been written about teachers’ views of NOS and how NOS is taught in the science classroom, but little is known about teachers’ views of the teaching of NOS. To be able to better understand how NOS becomes (or does not become) a part of science education, teachers’ ways of making meaning of NOS teaching needs to be investigated. Therefore, in this project, we try to shed light on teachers’ perspectives on NOS teaching at different levels in compulsory school. We also explore how the teaching of NOS is planned for, and implemented, throughout a three-year research project. The participants are Swedish in-service science teachers (n=12) in grades 3-9. They are teachers who, initially, have no specific training in NOS or NOS teaching (something they have in common with most science teachers in Sweden), but expected to teach NOS according to the national curriculum. During the project the teachers meet in focus groups, guided by a researcher, and discuss NOS and the teaching of NOS. Sources of data are questionnaires, interviews, focus-group discussions and classroom observations. The analytical framework used in this study is an elaboration of the NOS tenets in Lederman (2007) from an interdisciplinary Science Studies perspective. The results from the first part of the study indicate that although the teachers have access to different ways of speaking about NOS their ways of speaking become less elaborated in reference to NOS teaching. The teachers discuss both possible pros (e.g. student motivation, and NOS as a counterpart to the image of science as “black-and-white”) and cons (e.g. “good students” will be disadvantaged and difficulties for students to handle abstract topics.

The inclusion of nature of science (NOS) in science education has for a long  time been regarded as crucial. There is, however, a lack of research on appropriate NOS aspects for different educational levels. An even more neglected area of research is that focusing on teachers’ perspectives on NOS teaching at different levels. The aim of this article is to examine NOS progression in the light of teachers’ suggestions and rationales. In order to obtain teachers’ informed perspectives, we chose to involve six teachers (teaching grades 1–9) in a 3-year research project. They took part in focus group discussions about NOS and NOS teaching as well as implemented jointly planned NOS teaching sessions. Data that this article builds on was collected at the end of the project. The teachers’ suggestions for NOS progression often relied on adding more NOS issues at every stage, thereby creating the foundations of a broader but not necessarily deeper understanding of NOS. Five rationales, for if/when specific NOS issues are appropriate to introduce, emerged from the analysis of the teacher discussions. Some of these rationales, including practice makes perfect and increasing levels of depth can potentially accommodate room for many NOS issues in the science classroom, while maturity and experience instead has a restricting effect on NOS teaching. Also, choice of context and teaching approaches play an important role in teachers’ rationales for whether specific NOS issues  should be included or not at different stages. The article discusses the implications for teacher education and professional development.

Science education research on nature of science (NOS) has mostly focused students’ and teachers’ views of NOS, while less attention has been paid to the appropriateness of various NOS aspects at different levels in the educational system. Even more scarce is research focusing teachers’ perspectives on these matters. The aim of this study is to: 1) analyze NOS progression in the Swedish national curriculum, and 2) investigate science teachers’ perspectives on a NOS progression for year 1-9. Participants in the study are Swedish in-service science teachers (grades 1-9) who took part in a three-year research-project focusing NOS teaching. Throughout the project the teachers met in focus-group discussions. They also planned and implemented NOS lessons in their classrooms. Sources of data are: 1) curriculum material, and 2) two focus groups meetings about NOS progression (recorded and transcribed). The results show that many NOS aspects are, at least implicitly, part of the Swedish curriculum, but no specific progression is described. The teachers’ suggestions for NOS progression are based on arguments concerning the level of abstractness. Theoretical approaches and unfamiliar contexts are considered abstract, while hands-on activities, everyday contexts, and historical cases are considered concrete approaches to NOS.

Nature of science (NOS) has increasingly been emphasized as an important element in science education. This paper engages in the question of how teachers negotiate different approaches to and contexts for NOS teaching. This exploratory study is part of a three‐year longitudinal project where six in‐service teachers developed and negotiated their NOS‐teaching practices. Pickering's (1995) theory of the mangle of practice is used for the analysis of teachers’ focus‐group discussions. In a mangled practice, school science traditions, policy documents, and students’ and teachers’ expectations and identities are rubbed against each other. As part of the project teachers planned, implemented, and reflected on two NOS activities at different levels of contextualization. The concepts alignment, resistance, and accommodation are used as an analytical tool to understand the processes of the mangle in relation to teachers’ negotiations concerning the two activities during the focus groups. The results of the mangle are presented in relation to a backdrop of three teaching traditions (facts, lab‐work, and discussions) that the teachers’ claim to depart from. The results show how the alignment and resistance of different components of the mangle lead to various accommodations as regards both the activities and the three traditions. The article concludes by discussing how the teachers’ negotiations highlight what becomes possible and what becomes challenging when NOS meets existing traditions, and what this means in respect of possibilities for NOS learning.

The inclusion of nature of science (NOS) in science education, has for a long time been regarded a crucial component in the teaching for scientific literacy. Much has been written about teachers’ views of NOS and how NOS is taught in the science classroom, but less is known about the teachers’ views of the teaching of NOS. To be able to better understand how NOS becomes (or does not become) a part of science education, teachers’ views of the teaching of NOS needs to be investigated. Therefore, in this project, we aim to shed light on teachers’ ways of coping with two different approaches to NOS teaching – contextualized and decontextualized. We explore how the teaching of NOS is planned for, and communicated in the science classroom, as well as what difficulties and gains the teachers experience with the different approaches. The participants are Swedish in-service science teachers (n=6) in grades 3-9. During the project the teachers meet in focus groups, guided by a researcher, and discuss NOS and the teaching of NOS. Sources of data are audio recorded focus-group discussions and classroom observations. The results indicate that both approaches have benefits. A larger amount and more complex NOS aspects are addressed in the context-rich approach. However, the teachers in this study find the decontextualized task easier to fit within the traditional science-teaching frame.

Traditional school science has been described as focused on indisputable facts where scientific processes and factors affecting these processes become obscured or left undiscussed. In this article, we report on teachers’ perspectives on the teaching of sociocultural and subjective aspects of the nature of science (NOS) as a way to accomplish a more nuanced science teaching in Swedish compulsory school. The teachers (N = 6) took part in a longitudinal study on NOS and NOS teaching that spanned 3 years. The data consists of recorded and transcribed focus group discussions from all 3 years. In the analysis, the transcripts were searched for teachers’ suggestions of issues, relevant for teaching in compulsory school, as well as opportunities and challenges connected to the teaching of these issues. The results of the analysis show that (a) the number of suggested issues increased over the years, (b) teachers’ ways of contextualizing the issues changed from general and unprecise to more tightly connected to socio-scientific or scientific contexts, and (c) the number of both opportunities and challenges related to NOS teaching increased over the years. The most evident changes occurred from the beginning of year 2 when the focus group discussions became more closely directed towards concrete teaching activities. Tensions between the opportunities and challenges are discussed as well as how these can be met, and made use of, in science teacher education.

Students' interest in science is declining. Science teaching often have science as facts as its main focus. In such science teaching there is often little room for socio-cultural aspects of science. It has, however, been shown that students could gain more interest in science if broader perspectives are included. Making socio-cultural aspects a topic in the science classroom is considered hard. In order to gain more knowledge about issues related to the implementation of socio-cultural aspects in the science classroom we have focused on teachers' perspectives. In this presentation we will provide results from a three-year research-project. It is a case study of six teachers, teaching science in grades 1-9. During the project the teachers met in focus groups four times a year and discussed different aspects of science. During the focus-group meetings they also planned and reflected on classroom activities with a focus on socio-cultural issues, which they implemented between meetings. Questionnaires, interviews and classroom observations where used in addition to the data collected from the focus groups. The results provide information on teachers' perspectives on appropriate approaches and activities for different years, as well as information about teachers' perspectives on both challenges and benefits from implementing socio-cultural aspects.

The inclusion of "nature of science" (NOS) in science education has for a long time been regarded as a crucial component in the teaching for scientific literacy. The aim of this study is to investigate how in-service science teachers plan, implement, and afterwards reflect on a NOS teaching session. The participants in the study are Swedish in-service science teachers (n=4) in grades 4-9. Sources of data are teacher-group discussions (before and after the NOS-session), classroom observations, and teachers’ reflective notes. The analytical framework used in this study is developed with a point of departure in the NOS tenets described by Lederman (2007). The preliminary results indicate that although the teachers in different ways explicitly address many different aspects of NOS during the teaching sessions, and they believe that their students are interested in the provided tasks, the teachers themselves are having a hard time coping with the clash between the implemented NOS-session and more traditional views of science teaching.

Nature of science (NOS) has for a long time been regarded as a key component in science teaching. Much research has focused on students’ and teachers’ views of NOS, while less attention has been paid to teachers’ perspectives on NOS teaching. This article focuses on in-service science teachers’ ways of talking about NOS and NOS teaching, e.g. what they talk about as possible and valuable to address in the science classroom, in Swedish compulsory school. These teachers (N = 12) are, according to the national curriculum, expected to teach NOS, but have no specific NOS training. The analytical framework described in this article consists of five themes that include multiple perspectives on NOS. The results show that teachers have less to say when they talk about NOS teaching than when they talk about NOS in general. This difference is most obvious for issues related to different sociocultural aspects of science. Difficulties in — and advantages of — NOS teaching, as put forth by the teachers, are discussed in relation to traditional science teaching, and in relation to teachers’ perspectives on for which students science teaching will be perceived as meaningful and comprehensible. The results add to understanding teachers’ reasoning when confronted with the idea that NOS should be part of science teaching. This in turn provides useful information that can support the development of NOS courses for teachers.

Projektet bygger på en idé om att diskutera forskning och forskare genom att använda boksamtal kopplade till både fakta-böcker och sagoböcker med ett naturvetenskapligt innehåll. Data samlades in genom ljudinspelningar av boksamtal (N=152) i barngrupper (ålder 2-6 år). Boksamtalen leddes av 5 förskollärare som också deltog i fokusgrupper och workshops, vilka också lujdinspelades (N=9). Resultaten från projektet visar på möjligheter för rika diskussioner om vetenskapliga metoder och redskap samt mänskliga och sociala aspekter av naturvetenskap. Resultaten visar också att den sortens samtal var möjliga att föra oberoende av bok-typ, men om boken inte hade några explicita hänvisningar till forskning och forskare behövde läraren hitta andra sätt att rikta barnens uppmärksamhet mot den sorters diskussioner. Vidare visade resultaten att förskollärarna upplevde att boksamtalen gav spin-off-effekter på barnens nyfikenhet, att barnen ställde nya frågor och att de fick ett ökat intresse för egna undersökningar. Resultaten pekar därför på att diskussioner om forskning och forskare har potentialen att bidra till barns egenmakt och agens, vilket i sin tur är viktigt i en verksamhet som byggs upp kring demokrati och rättvisa. Med utgångspunkt i resultaten presenterar vi en didaktiska modell som kan vägleda förskollärare när de introducerar den här sortens diskussioner i sina barngrupper.