Search

This paper is an introduction to and a synthesis of three papers in this issue written by scholars deeply committed to partnering with communities to understand and enact what it means to realize transformational ends in and through science education. Partnering for justice must be a conversation, a work in progress, and a critical examination that leads to intentional and careful forward movement. It is a beautiful effort at flattening power hierarchies so diverse voices and expertise can be interwoven in service of youth and communities who have been invisibilized and marginalized. Committed to realizing new, hope‐filled futures, the three pairs of authors use their experiences and expertise to shed light on the work of partnering using a temporal lens: considerations related to the beginnings, middles, and endings of partnering, each of which requires special intentionality and care. Together the authors share core overlapping tenets with other critical scholars that could be considered a partnering for justice epistemology. This epistemology underscores how importantly different learning through partnering for justice is from traditional notions of academic research. I close the paper by sharing lessons learned from my own 20‐plus years of partnering for justice, using the tenets of partnering for justice epistemology as a lens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research in languages and literacies in science education (LLSE) has developed substantial theoretical and pedagogical insights into how students learn science through language, discourse, and multimodal representations. At the same time, language is central to the functioning of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI). On this common basis concerning the role of language, this paper explores how foundational ideas from LLSE studies can inform the use of GenAI in science education. A bibliometric analysis of 412 journal articles from Web of Science provided the initial step to identify major themes and relationships in the LLSE literature. The analysis revealed four clusters of research in LLSE: reading and writing scientific text, science discourse and interaction, multilingual science classroom, and multimodality and representations. Each cluster was further analyzed through close reading of selected articles to identify and connect key constructs to the potential use of GenAI. These constructs include the interactive‐constructive reading model, text genre, reading‐writing integration, dialogic interaction, critical questioning, argumentation, translanguaging, hybridity, thematic pattern, modal affordance, and transduction. From these ideas and connections, the paper recommends several pedagogical principles for science educators to guide the use of GenAI. It concludes that LLSE research offers valuable insights for researchers and teachers to investigate and design the use of GenAI in science education. In turn, the impending use of GenAI also calls for a rethinking of literacy that will shape future research in LLSE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although adults are known to play an important role in young children's development, little work has focused on the enactive features of scaffolding in informal learning settings, and the embodied dynamics of intergenerational interaction. To address this gap, this paper undertakes a microinteractional analysis to examine intergenerational collaborative interaction in a science museum setting. The paper presents a fine‐grained moment‐by‐moment analysis of video‐recorded interaction of children and their adult carers around science‐themed objects. Taking an enactive cognition perspective, the analysis enables access to subtle shifts in interactants' perception, action, gesture, and movement to examine how young children engage with exhibits, and the role adult action plays in supporting young children's engagement with exhibits and developing ideas about science. Our findings demonstrate that intergenerational "embodied scaffolding" is instrumental in making "enactive potentialities" in the environment more accessible for children, thus deepening and enriching children's engagement with science. Adult action is central to revealing scientific dimensions of objects' interaction and relationships in ways that expose novel types of perception and action opportunities in shaping science experiences and meaning making. This has implications for science education practices since it foregrounds not only "doing" science, through active hands‐on activities, but also speaks to the interconnectedness between senses and the role of the body in thinking. Drawing on the findings, this paper also offers design implications for informal science learning environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The predominant conceptualization of scientific literacy occurs on the micro scale of an individual person. However, scientific literacy can also be exhibited at the meso scale by groups of people in communities of place, practice, or interest. What comprises this community level scientific literacy (CSL) is both understudied and undertheorized. In this paper, we utilized a systematic literature review to describe how CSL is characterized in the extant literature and a Delphi survey of experts to elicit more current thought. Guided by cultural‐historical activity theory, inductive and deductive analyses produced seven elements of CSL and their constituent characteristics: (1) resources, (2) attributes of those resources, (3) actors, (4) interactions between actors, (5) contexts, (6) topics, and (7) purposes. The typology created through this process is meant to be generative, serving as a starting point for continuing refinement within science education and other fields related to science learning and knowing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When learning about scientific phenomena, students are expected to mechanistically explain how underlying interactions produce the observable phenomenon and conceptually connect the observed phenomenon to canonical scientific knowledge. This paper investigates how the integration of the complementary processes of designing and refining computational models using real‐world data can support students in developing mechanistic and canonically accurate explanations of diffusion. Specifically, we examine two types of shifts in how students explain diffusion as they create and refine computational models using real‐world data: a shift towards mechanistic reasoning and a shift from noncanonical to canonical explanations. We present descriptive statistics for the whole class as well as three student work examples to illustrate these two shifts as 6th grade students engage in an 8‐day unit on the diffusion of ink in hot and cold water. Our findings show that (1) students develop mechanistic explanations as they build agent‐based models, (2) students' mechanistic reasoning can co‐exist with noncanonical explanations, and (3) students shift their thinking toward canonical explanations after comparing their models against data. These findings could inform the design of modeling tools that support learners in both expressing a diverse range of mechanistic explanations of scientific phenomena and aligning those explanations with canonical science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies of both professional science practice and children's science learning show that care is not merely ancillary to disciplinary work but a core and generative constituent of science practice. In science education research, however, students' care is often overlooked. In this paper, we describe the expression of care across two STEM classrooms (6th and 9th grade) studying biology and ecology and participating in a pen pal exchange. We analyze artifacts from the pen pal exchange as well as students' retrospective interviews and written reflections. Two ways of expressing care surfaced in students' letters: caring for guppies and caring for pen pals. We describe each form of care using examples from our data. We find that students' care for guppies and pen pals was both instrumental (in service of their investigations) and intrinsic (positioning guppies and pen pals as inherently valuable). We then connect these findings to studies of care in children's science learning and in professional science. We discuss methodological and practical implications for recognizing and analyzing how students' care manifests in classrooms and for designing learning activities that cultivate care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a literature review of science teaching approaches that seek to support equity in science classrooms, focusing on marginalization based on (i) race/ethnicity, (ii) social class/socioeconomic background, and (iii) religion. Considered were approaches that science teachers can use in science classes in secondary schools. They were analyzed and discussed against the backdrop of critical pedagogy by Paulo Freire and the educational theory by Hannah Arendt, which constitutes a novelty in science education research. The review used meta interpretation combined with systematic searches in the ERIC database. It is, thus, limited to works published in English. A total of 930 articles (2013–2021) were identified out of which 64 were fully analyzed. The analysis shows that most approaches strive to provide more equal access to the existing science knowledge and structures of the community. This corresponds to the introduction to the "old world" in a conservative interpretation of Arendt's term. I argue that in addition, it is necessary to employ a more radical interpretation of the "old world" as fundamentally plural which is done in translanguaging and grappling with racism. Further, the transformative nature of science education needs to be strengthened in terms of Freire's critical pedagogy and Arendt's concept of natality. This means allowing students to become aware of oppressive structures to induce change. Only youth participatory science, youth participatory action research, and grappling with racism explicitly aim for this. This shows that nuanced perspectives on equity in science education are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is one of three sequential papers interrogating equity in partnerships (or partnering relationships [PRs]) in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. In this piece, we prioritize abundance framing and dignity‐conferring work when engaging in partnerships with and for communities who have been historically marginalized. We propose a framework of seven drivers that define the directions and/or success of PRs: (1) mission, vision, or values; (2) goals or outcomes; (3) practices or processes; (4) power, privilege, or oppression; (5) communities and geography; (6) time and urgency; and (7) partners. This framework can be used to examine PRs at any phase of their existence to ensure equity‐centered and dignity‐conferring processes and outcomes. We discuss case studies that are common or specific challenges or frustrations that occur in nonequity‐centered PRs. We frame these as six vexations: (1) sustainable PRs; (2) dignity‐conferring PRs; (3) repetitive PRs; (4) political PRs; (5) "mission trip" PRs; (6) and deceptive PRs. We address these by using a data feminist lens (a perspective inspired by the book Data Feminism that centers on justice in defining and presenting outcomes), and future dreamings (a perspective that centers on potential ahead) to define our suggestions for designing intentional endings of partnerships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Concepts in science education such as "science identity" and "science capital" are informed by dominant epistemological and ontological positions, which translate into assumptions about what counts as science and whose science counts. In this theoretical paper we draw on decolonial and antiracist perspectives to examine these assumptions in light of the heterogeneous onto‐epistemological and axiological values, cultural perspectives, and contributions of nondominant groups, and specifically of those who have been historically marginalized based on their gender, race, ethnic, age, and/or social class identity. Building on these arguments, we critique deficit‐based approaches to science teaching, learning, and research, including those that focus on systemic injustice, yet leave intact dominant framings of the scientific enterprise, which are exclusionary and meritocratic. As an alternative, we offer a design of science teaching and learning for the pluriverse—"a world where many worlds fit". This alternative allows us to reconstruct science and science‐related "outcomes," such as identity, in the service of cultural, epistemic, and linguistic pluralism. We close the paper with the idea that because mainstream theories reproduce deficit framings and educational injustices, we must engage with decolonial1 theories of pluriversality and discuss different onto‐epistemologies to be able to grapple with existing social, racial, environmental injustices, and land‐based devastations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current science instruction does not educate K‐12 students equitably and creates short‐ and long‐term impacts on individual students and society. While students may be present in class, they may not have access to quality science learning experiences. The goals of this paper are to show how science instruction may not be reaching its aim of equitable access and to offer recommendations for creating a new baseline standard for equitable science instruction. Though not exhaustive, this paper identifies groups of students who are marginalized in current‐day science instruction—the racially minoritized, those with physical and cognitive differences, and those in urban or rural communities. First, this paper challenges the neutrality of science by highlighting systemic yet negative outcomes that disproportionately impact minoritized populations in everyday life because of the narrow network of people who define and solve problems. Second, this paper identifies examples where science instruction is not of its highest quality for the highlighted groups. Third, we present a synthesis of research‐informed solutions proposed to improve both the quality of science instruction and its equitable access for the highlighted groups, creating a new baseline standard for equitable science instruction. An elevated baseline would address the existing disparities in who has access to quality science instruction and consequently reduce the gatekeeper effect of who defines and solves societal problems that perpetuate intergenerational inequities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intercultural teaching practices for science education (ITPSE) are suitable to support science teachers in bringing cultural inclusion into their classrooms. The epistemological bridge is the base of the ITPSE design since this approach describes culturally inclusive teaching of science. There is an ITPSE of planning and one of enactment. With those ITPSE, teachers engage students in explaining a phenomenon from science's epistemology and nonhegemonic cultures' epistemologies. Design‐based research is the methodology to produce the ITPSE through three design–test–design cycles. This paper reports on the third cycle to identify evidence to redesign the ITPSE. As a result, the teacher enacted through the ITPSE a version of the epistemological bridge very close to the framework. In addition, her reflection and feedback pointed to the guiding tools refinement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Families commonly document their outings by capturing their experiences through digital photographs and videos. However, little is known about the ways in which families engage their personal mobile devices to document educational family outings and how they subsequently talk about the digital artifacts that captured their informal learning experiences. This paper presents new evidence on family digital artifact creation during an informal science institution (ISI) visit, the expected and actual uses of their digital artifacts after the visit, and family conversations reminiscing about the ISI visit with the digital artifacts. Using a concurrent triangulation mixed‐methods design, data on family digital artifact creation during an aquarium visit (N = 204) and digital artifact use after the visit (n = 67) were collected using parent surveys. Audio‐recorded parent‐child conversations with a subset of families (n = 25) document whether and how families use their digital artifacts to reminisce about the aquarium visit. Quantitative findings detail family digital technology practices during informal learning experiences, and qualitative findings suggest evidence of informal science learning in the everyday interactions of the families who elected to continue the study. The study indicates that family storytelling and digital technology practices may help to bridge informal science learning from ISI to home and frames family non‐participation within an anti‐deficit perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Science educators are integrating more and more computational thinking (CT) activities into their curricula. Proponents of CT offer two motivations: familiarizing students with a realistic depiction of the computational nature of modern scientific practices and encouraging more students from underrepresented backgrounds to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. However, some studies show that increasing exposure to computing may not necessarily translate to the hypothesized gains in participation by female students and students of color. Therefore, paying close attention to students' engagement in computationally intense science activities is important to finding more impactful ways to promote equitable science education. In this paper, we present an in‐depth analysis of the interactions among a small, racially diverse group of high school students during a chemistry unit with tightly integrated CT activities. We find a salient interaction between the students' engagement with the CT activities and their social identification with publicly recognizable categories such as "enjoys coding" or "finds computing boring." We show that CT activities in science education can lead to numerous rich interactions that could, if leveraged correctly, allow educators to facilitate more inclusive science classrooms. However, we also show that such opportunities would be missed unless teachers are attentive to them. We discuss the implications of our findings on future work to integrate CT across science curricula and teacher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we argue that the current science curricula are failing to educate students to be competent outsiders to science. Historically, science education has rested on two premises. The first is that it is possible for students to acquire sufficient scientific knowledge from K‐12 education to become intellectually independent. That is that science education can produce individuals capable of evaluating scientific evidence and arguments critically for themselves. This belief is what underlies many of the conceptions of scientific literacy and is the basis of the rationale that is used to sustain and justify what is offered in nearly all countries across the globe. The second is the belief that the science that students will encounter will have been filtered such that it can be trusted. Nothing today could be further from the truth. Today, misinformation abounds and much of it purports to be scientific. Very few conceptions of scientific literacy have considered how students can be prepared to evaluate the claims that abound on social media. Current conceptions of "scientific literacy," we argue, are failing to articulate the competencies and knowledge required in today's changed context. In what follows, we lay out our arguments for why it is time to rethink the conception of scientific literacy by considering what it requires to be a competent outsider to science. Then drawing on our recent report, we lay out what might be done within science education to address the specific phenomenon of misinformation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In considering goals for science education, it is conventional to make arguments for the utility of scientific knowledge for a variety of purposes. Less prominent are rationales based on the beauty or truth of science. In this paper, we examine how an approach to science education might be different if we shift the goals of communication to an appreciation of the ways in which our knowledge is limited, and how the practical boundaries of our knowledge can be closer than we think—in other words, how we are collectively ignorant. Key to this approach is a renewed understanding of the role of material investigations in providing partial knowledge. Instead of providing incontrovertible evidence, empirical investigations provide a form of "explanatory excess" whereby the appropriate choice of explanation is not necessarily one that can be simplistically determined. Although scientific practices provide techniques to minimize the possibility of error in making our conclusions, these practices are performed by fallible human communities, from which the notion of "tentative, yet durable" claims derives. We argue that public scientific literacy may be better served by more circumspect claims of validity, and crucially, an enhanced understanding of the ways in which materiality influences epistemic processes and limits our claims. We illustrate these proposals through the case of the International Young Physicists' Tournament, a contest that invites participants to play with interesting physical phenomena for over a year. We identify three factors prominent in these tournament problems that present possibilities for increasing the authenticity of practical investigations. These are (i) multiple physical interactions in phenomena leading to the openness of choice of explanatory theory; (ii) the qualitative, subjective nature of the explanatory utility of theories; and (iii) the material contingency of empirical investigations. We argue that a more open‐handed embrace of the limits of our knowledge may serve as a better epistemic orientation for science instruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

All authors were participants in the associated NSF-sponsored project Science Education Campaign for Research, Equity & Teaching (NSF #2029956). The first two essays of this issue belong among those published as the I Equity-Centered Science Education i Special Issue. Her framing and commentary piece complements the following papers published in the special issue: Kang, H., & González-Howard, M. (2022). [Extracted from the article]

This paper's focus is on the "middle" of partnerships for equity in science education. Middle is used in a temporal sense, meaning the time after the general purposes and terms of working together have been set and before outcomes have been achieved. The middle of the partnership also represents people interacting, bounded around the edges, by their institutional roles, norms, resources, and priorities. As co‐authors who had not previously collaborated (or even met in person), we approached the construction of this manuscript as a dialogue where we learn by sharing narrations of experiences and values and principles. We were inspired by the conversational book between Horton and Freire (1990) and specifically their discussion of "Is it possible to just teach biology?" (p. 102). In our conversation, we illustrate the ways in which partnerships may make justice‐oriented science education possible. Our focus is on complementary and contradictory knowledges, and ways of knowing, institutional resources and constraints, and strategies for making transformative change. We explore the middle of partnerships as a series of opportunities for learning and growing, caring for one another, and building solidarity spaces together. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While there is evidence to support the existence of identity‐based disparities, inequities, and biases in the academic journal peer‐review process, little research supports the presence of this bias in the peer‐review process for academic journals in science education. Through an analysis of six leading journals in science education, we aimed to investigate the extent to which diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), as well as the presence of bias in the peer‐review process, are addressed by these journals. We analyzed trends in the gender/sex, geographical affiliation, race/ethnicity, and the presence of equity‐centered research focus for members of these journals' editors and editorial boards. We found that although gender/sex is well‐balanced in these journals' editors and editorial boards, they are typically North American centric, and White individuals are overwhelmingly represented. Four journals had a quarter or more of individuals who pursue equity‐centered research. Only two journals provided detailed information on how manuscripts are reviewed in their author submission guidelines. All used a double‐blind approach to peer‐review. One of the journals includes an explicit position on DEI. Based on the analyses and reflections on our own experiences, we recommend science education journals consider ways to probe whether bias does exist in their peer‐review process, diversify their board to be more inclusive of scholars from communities historically marginalized, and move to a triple‐blind approach to their peer‐review process as mechanisms to mitigate bias in the journal peer review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Addressing equity issues in science education requires a reorientation to how science students are advised and how science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education, particularly science, is viewed. STEM education is often figuratively described as a pipeline containing students who leak out before reaching the nexus of their STEM education/career journey. The authors of this paper argue that STEM education must be viewed from an ecosystems perspective, where students interact with one another, their physical environment and cultural contexts, and other humans who can support them in becoming STEM professionals. Within this STEM ecosystem, many individuals have a pivotal role in supporting students as they learn and develop within the science field. These individuals, particularly advisors, must possess knowledge, beliefs, skills, and dispositions that help students cultivate a sense of belonging, engage them in critical thinking about their academic and career choices, and aid their identity development in learning as becoming in STEM professions. The authors describe who these individuals are, the roles they play, and also provide practical examples, using vignettes, of how advisors can support students of color pursuing science degrees and careers. Finally, recognizing that students' STEM advising ecosystem operates at any grade level or stage of life, the authors have organized the descriptive portion of this study according to the following levels elementary, secondary, undergraduate, graduate, and career. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most of the tools developed in the area of Science Education aimed at analyzing either the product or the process of argumentation do not consider the following: (a) arguments are a part of dialogues, (b) dialogues present different objectives, (c) dialogues start from different assumptions, and (d) dialogues shape the roles and moves of interlocutors. This paper intends to address the analysis of argumentative exchanges within educational science dialogues considering several aspects of argumentation that have neglected to be investigated in the field of education, such as the relations among individual moves and the dialogues they are part of, and the influence of such moves on knowledge construction. Toward this purpose, a proposed tool is presented, which describes argumentative dialogues in science teaching contexts across the varied and interrelated dimensions. This tool, consisting of six analytical aspects, is applied to high school chemistry students' argumentative dialogues taking place during modeling activities. Data collection (involving audio and video recording plus observations made by the researchers) revealed the main affordances of this tool as follows: (a) favoring an understanding of the individual and collective students' intentions; (b) enabling the characterization of argumentative discourse beyond the moves of refuting, questioning and providing support; (c) enabling the identification of whether knowledge construction has occurred; and (d) the possibility of analyzing teaching situations across different contexts. Thus, the tool supports the descriptions and analyses of the scientific argumentation process and the associated knowledge construction by students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Science education researchers agree about the importance of evidence in science practices such as argumentation. Yet, disagreements and ambiguities about what counts as "evidence" in science classrooms pervade the literature. We argue that these ambiguities and disagreements can be viewed as falling along three fault lines: (i) the source of evidence, specifically, whether it must be first‐hand; (ii) whether "evidence" must always be empirical; and (iii) the extent to which evidence is inferred, and what degree of inference transforms "evidence" into something else. In this paper, after showing how these three fault lines manifest in the literature, we argue that these three dimensions of disagreements and ambiguities are not confined to research and research‐based curricula; they are also salient in teachers' classroom practice, as illustrated by a dramatic, multiday debate between a mentor teacher and her teacher intern. After establishing the salience of the three fault lines in both research and practice, we explore whether Next Generation Science Standard (NGSS) can provide a resolution to the teachers' debate and to the disagreements/ambiguities in the literature. Our analysis reveals that NGSS reproduces rather than resolves those three fault lines—but in doing so, it invites a resolution of a different type. Instead of providing a single, precise, context‐independent definition of "evidence," NGSS implicitly reflects a defensible view that what counts as "evidence" depends on the epistemic aims of the practices in which the students are engaged. This implied context‐dependency of what counts as good evidence use, we argue, could be made explicit in an addendum document clarifying aspects of NGSS. Doing so would provide valuable guidance to teachers, teacher educators, and researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the potential of civic science education (CSE), which includes experiences that have been intentionally designed to foster or enhance individuals' interactions with and/or engagement in science‐related public matters. To begin, we provide a theoretically‐grounded definition of CSE, including three sub‐categories: foundational, exploratory, and purposefully active. We then explore the scholarly arguments for why enacting CSE could help to support students' science learning and civic engagement and also strengthen civil society. Next, the paper examines current educational practices related to CSE, such as citizen science, exploring socioscientific issues, and various civic education pedagogies, detailing what researchers have learned from empirical studies of these practices. Building on this prior theory and research, we argue that CSE could motivate students both to learn science and become engaged in civic issues, with slightly different expected outcomes across the three CSE categories. We conclude by encouraging educators and researchers to explore the great potential of such practices, providing specific recommendations for curriculum development and empirical studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of group drawing to promote student‐generated representation is a common instructional strategy as it combines the benefits of using visual representation and collaborative talk. Although the affordances of group drawing have increasingly been emphasized in science education, few studies have investigated how drawing as a visual mode interacts with group discourse as a verbal mode as well as how that interaction facilitates the development of students' collective ideas. Informed by theories in classroom discourse and multimodality, this paper examines the interaction process between a verbal and visual mode of representation as groups of students engaged in collaborative drawing during guided science inquiry lessons. On the basis of the analysis of data from a science class that adopted group drawing, we found and documented a recurring pattern, Plan‐Draw‐Evaluate or PDE pattern, in how the interaction between the verbal and visual modes occurred during collaborative drawing. This PDE pattern consisted of a triad of moves that alternate between the two modes and fulfilled various discursive purposes, such as suggesting, requesting, recording, visualizing, elaborating, agreeing, and rejecting. The PDE pattern provided a basic social structure that facilitated the collaboration and progression of students' ideas. With illustrations of PDE patterns and its variations, we argue that the PDE pattern provides an insight into the dynamic organization of interactions involved in group drawing that takes into consideration the multimodal affordances of verbal and visual modes of representation and the progression of ideas developed through collaborative discourse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Building on previous research that has described the underrepresentation of women of color in science fields, this paper presents case studies of Black middle school girls to examine how their science identities developed over space and time. Data were collected over the course of their seventh‐grade year in both in school (science classroom) and out‐of‐school (afterschool club) contexts. The Multidimensionality of Black Girls' STEM Learning framework was used to explore the role of the afterschool club as a counterspace and how students made sense of science, science people, and their current and future selves based on their experiences in school and after school science contexts. All three participants struggled to see their future selves as scientists and made distinctions amongst being a science person, a person who likes science, or a scientist. They also negotiated views of science as active and hands‐on in the afterschool setting while experiencing more passive and decontextualized forms of science in the formal school setting. Implications include a need to disrupt the culture of science and reimagine formal science education by learning from out‐of‐school time science programs that function as counterspaces to support Black girls' science identity. We conclude that there remains a need to draw attention to and understand the role of race and racism in science education so that Black girls' science identities are affirmed beyond counterspaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Science education that fosters scientific competency and engagement prepares students to become informed civic participants in modern society. Teaching strategies that encourage scientific engagement are especially important in rural settings, as these students are less likely to pursue scientific careers or use science in their everyday lives. To this aim, we implemented a citizen science approach in science education, an approach that enables K‐12 grade students to participate in locally relevant and authentic scientific research, in suburban and rural 5th and 9th–12th grade classrooms. While most citizen science education initiatives are led by experienced scientists, we recognized the additional level of learning that may arise from positioning undergraduate students as curricular designers of the citizen science classroom activities and partners for the classroom teachers. This study evaluates perceived changes in science engagement, science identity, and science competency that emerged as a result of participating in this citizen science initiative, both for the 5th and 9th–12th school students and the undergraduate instructors. Classroom teachers reported that students demonstrated an increased level of engagement with and excitement about science. The undergraduate instructors reported a renewed sense of confidence in their science abilities and a deepened sense of place in the science community. Finally, the educators involved in this project, both classroom K‐12 teachers and undergraduate higher education educators, observed the benefits of this model for connecting students at different points in their science learning journeys. In our discussion, we articulate the benefits and challenges of implementing a multilevel approach to citizen science education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research in science education with multilingual learners (MLs) has expanded rapidly. This rapid expansion can be situated within a larger dialogue about what it means to provide minoritized students with an equitable education. Whereas some conceptions of equity focus on ensuring all students have access to the knowledge, practices, and language normatively valued in K‐12 schools (equity as access), increasingly prominent conceptions focus on transforming those knowledge, practices, and language in ways that center minoritized students and their communities (equity as transformation). In this article, we argue that conceptions of equity provide a useful lens for understanding emerging research in science education with MLs and for charting a research agenda. We begin by tracing how conceptions of equity have evolved in parallel across STEM and multilingual education. Then, we provide an overview of recent developments from demographic, theoretical, and policy perspectives. In the context of these developments, we provide a conceptual synthesis of emerging research by our team of early‐career scholars in three areas: (a) learning, (b) assessment, and (c) teacher education. Within each area, we unpack the research efforts in terms of how they attend to equity as access while pushing toward equity as transformation. Finally, we propose a research agenda for science education with MLs that builds on and extends these efforts. We close by offering recommendations for making this research agenda coherent and impactful: (a) being explicit about our conceptions of equity, (b) paying attention to the interplay of structure and agency, and (c) promoting interdisciplinary collaboration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Engagement with socioscientific issues (SSI) has emerged as an important focus for science education. SSI have been successfully used to teach science concepts, but they also serve a role in helping learners develop a capacity to engage with science in everyday life. Here we present an epistemic framework for characterizing socioscientific reasoning (SSR), called the vAIR framework standing for virtuous Aims, Ideals, and Reasoning Practices. vAIR is a modification of the AIR framework for epistemic cognition. The "virtuous" framing of vAIR is to align with the language of Sosa's virtue epistemology, reflecting a capacity to engage in reasoning that promotes a collective praxis/enterprise. vAIR was developed from a study of citizens engaged in an authentic SSI to offer a deeper authenticity than might be achieved in the study of a classroom. The goal was to better understand the ontologically distinct components of SSR, as well as gain a better understanding of what "constructive" SSR might look like in the context of collective praxis/enterprise in the everyday world. The findings are presented through a series of vignettes that capture the rich detail of the context as well as the nuances between the dimensions of the vAIR model. vAIR, we argue, can serve as a tool for scaffolding the development and assessment of SSR in classrooms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The increasing attention in science education reform documents to language and literacy, coupled with the growing linguistic diversity of United States classrooms, means that science teacher educators and researchers are facing an important task of preparing secondary science preservice teachers (PSTs) to teach a language‐ and literacy‐integrated form of science in linguistically diverse classrooms. Unfortunately, research in this field is in its nascency, and while some studies have addressed PSTs' instructional planning for and implementation of language‐ and literacy‐integrated science instruction, none have considered the unique contextual factors that inform PSTs' uptake of these reform‐oriented instructional practices, despite many studies suggesting student‐teaching contexts are a key factor in PSTs' instructional decisions. The purpose of this multiple case study was to consider the unique contextual factors that supported and constrained three PSTs' uptake of language‐ and literacy‐integrated science practices through a Cultural‐Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) lens. Findings indicated that PSTs' implementation of language‐ and literacy‐integrated science instruction was shaped by interactions among the mediating elements of their student teaching activity systems, including PSTs' division of labor with mentor teachers, the classroom and school norms, PSTs' perceptions of their classroom communities, and PSTs' past life experiences and resources. These findings highlight the roles that different elements of learning‐to‐teach contexts can play in PSTs' enactment of reform‐oriented instruction. Implications for science teacher education, instruction for emergent bilinguals, and research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Science education reform efforts have emphasized the incorporation of more authentic and meaningful scientific practices into formal learning environments. With this focus on practices, such as scientific modeling, a powerful tool for sense‐making and reasoning, comes a need to observe and understand if and how it is actually occurring, particularly in elementary science learning environments. To address this need, and moving forward an international, collaborative research effort centered around scientific modeling, we undertook a cross‐national observational study in which we used an observation protocol to characterize scientific modeling practices in elementary classrooms in both the United States and Germany. Drawing on existing video‐based datasets from multiple projects, this study's findings provide empirical evidence for model‐based teaching and learning and explore the relative frequencies of relevant modeling subpractices (i.e., construction, use, evaluation, and revision of scientific models) in regular, day‐to‐day elementary science classrooms. This study also illustrates the differences and similarities between German and American science instruction. In general, students in both countries experience model construction more often than other modeling practices. German teachers more consistently foreground anchoring phenomena and students' questions/preconceptions as part of the modeling process, thus leading to slightly higher overall modeling scores—despite a complete lack of model evaluation and revision in any of the observed German classrooms. Ultimately, however, young learners in both nations seem to experience alarmingly little opportunities to engage in any of the modeling subpractices. Particularly in terms of modeling as a means to make sense of phenomena, constrained by teachers most commonly using finished representations (i.e., models) of phenomena and processes to teach science/deliver content. Our results indicate the need for a greater focus on all scientific modeling subprocesses, particularly the integration of scientific modeling with already established, more general (e.g., inquiry‐based) strategies for effective science teaching and an emphasis on actualizing modeling as an authentic sense‐making endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In both K‐12 and university settings, instructors and curriculum developers need to create learning experiences that provide students opportunities to engage in the disciplinary practices of science and engineering. However, instructional contexts pose challenges in developing such tasks. Using a framework focusing on conceptual and material epistemic practices and tools, we used a within‐subjects comparison to explore two different types of task designs, given realistic constraints posed by a large‐enrollment university engineering laboratory course. We investigated students' modeling and experimental activity at scale using an innovative data analysis tool, Model Maps, looking for evidence of epistemic practices in student laboratory notebooks and in their post‐project presentations. We compared inscriptions of 29 teams across three laboratory projects and found a greater number and diversity of model components in a virtual laboratory project than in two physical laboratory projects. While fitting into the same instructional "space," the virtual laboratory task, compared to the physical tasks, better afforded iteration. The iterative development engaged students in two important features of engineering epistemic practice. First, teams had the opportunity to engage in interlocking conceptual and material practices. Second the need to reconcile experimental data with their process models elicited the authorship of free moves together with the accountability of forced moves. Implications for designing instruction to incorporate epistemic practices in engineering and science education are described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific misinformation and disinformation, proliferating via the internet and social media, are now significant problems. Proposed solutions vary substantially. Here, I describe a set of prospective benchmarks—10 competencies—that seem essential for reorienting science education to address the challenge. They include, first, elements of epistemic motivation, including basic epistemological beliefs about "constructed" knowledge, adopting a posture of respect for empirical evidence, and an understanding of our epistemic dependence on experts. Second, the benchmarks include perspectives and skills in interacting with media sources. These include how to identify experts, how to identify credible gatekeepers, how to recognize deceptive strategies, and how to deal with social networks and technology. Finally, the competencies include self‐regulation, such as acknowledging the cognitive dispositions that bias our thinking (especially about information that challenges our pre‐existing beliefs) and the counter‐balancing role of consensus. I hope that these competency goals can function as a concrete target in guiding discussion of perhaps more complete or more nuanced approaches to the current crisis. With such competencies clearly and explicitly articulated, teachers will be better positioned to develop effective classroom strategies to nurture the relevant competencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The core of this essay is a review of Alexander Bogner's book "The Epistemization of Politics" (2021). It fits into the ongoing discussion about the role of scientism in science education. Bogner makes the provocative case that science denialism inadvertently points to contemporary scientism in the public sphere, and he observes that many science deniers mobilize (counter)experts and (counter)expertise because better knowledge seems to be "the harder currency" than softer values and interests, emotions, fears, or epistemological dissent. In this way, Bogner explains, the struggle for political hegemony has turned into a struggle for better knowledge. He calls this the epistemization of politics—a new form of political scientism. In this essay, I describe why reading this book was so valuable to me as a teaching professional and why I decided to share some important points with other science educators and scholars. I pose four important questions that I asked myself after reading Bogner's book—about scientism in school science paving the way for scientism in policy, about Science Studies positions in science education as a possible backdoor to science denial, about the role of the naturalistic fallacy in science education (do we always distinguish between facts and values?), and about how scientism in school science threatens the agency of our students. I discuss these points in light of recent publications in the science education literature. The essay is concluded with a number of original quotes from the last chapter of Bogner's book, which revisits his main points and can serve as a stimulus for further reflection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research has recommended centering health disparities to make science instruction relevant to students from minoritized racial and ethnic groups. While promoted as a recent innovation, the repurposing of science instruction to improve the health of demographic groups has a longer history traceable to segregated and colonial schooling. Using a historicizing approach, this study explores how certain U.S. science classrooms have become clinics of preventative care aimed at transforming groups into healthy citizens. Analysis identifies how U.S. science education studies have used psychological, sociological, and anthropological lenses to divide students into populations, classifying some as needing intervention to improve their minds (e.g., basic health knowledge), home lives (e.g., daily habits), and cultural beliefs (e.g., attitudes toward science and medicine). Through systematic analysis of U.S. science education journals and sources cited therein, I map shifts over three periods: the rise of urban, segregated, and colonial schooling (1901–45), postwar desegregation and international development (1946–89), and equity reforms (1990–2021). Despite declines in deficit language, analysis suggests the intervention space of the science‐class‐as‐clinic still demarcates groups as not yet fully reasoning, self‐regulating, or agentic, and as needing the applied relevance of preventative health. Paradoxically, efforts to redress disparities may reinsert older distinctions by positing groups as educationally and medically at‐risk—implicitly locating inequities within students rather than the unjust systemic conditions they face. I conclude with implications for research and practice, highlighting approaches that do not treat educational and health inequities as problems to be fixed in the child, family, or community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Joining the campaign to center justice-oriented theory and practice in science education In I Theoretical Perspectives for Developing Anti-Racist Teaching Dispositions and Practices in Preservice Teacher Education i , Madkins and Restrepo Nazar unpack the idea of developing political clarity as a central part of science education and becoming an antiracist teacher/teacher educator. Keywords: equity; teacher learning EN equity teacher learning 1342 1345 4 10/21/22 20221101 NES 221101 INTRODUCTION The fields of teacher learning and science teacher learning are undertheorized (Horn & Garner, 2022). [Extracted from the article]

Science education researchers have highlighted how uncertainty can foster meaningful scientific sense‐making, supporting students to re‐evaluate their understandings of scientific phenomena and pursue deeper causal accounts. However, facilitating whole‐class conversations motivated by uncertainty is complex and challenging, calling for further descriptions of the pedagogical work involved for teachers. In this study, we consider recurring pedagogical decision points as a way to get a handle on how teachers orchestrate classroom conversations and improvise to respond to students' reasoning. To examine these decision points, we analyzed five classroom episodes where classroom communities transformed a student's expression of uncertainty into an episode of collective, scientific sense‐making. Across these episodes, we found that teachers needed to make decisions around (1) whether to make space for an uncertainty, (2) how to transform an uncertainty into a collective problem, (3) which elements to fix and which to leave open, (4) when and how to support the class to evaluate their accounts, (5) whether to make space for and/or mark new goals. Using detailed analyses of two episodes, along with short descriptions of the others, we illustrate how these decision points emerged, the different choices teachers made, and how these decisions shaped the trajectories of the classroom conversations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores and wrestles with the various discourses that arise when considering why it is important to advise students from an assets‐based and holistic approach into science‐related majors and careers. Our hope is to inform how and why it is important to advise students into science‐related careers, specifically, and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields, more generally, from an ethical and justice‐oriented approach. We begin with a review of empirical literature that highlights the different approaches to advising and the challenges racially and gender‐minoritized students often face in STEM fields. We then review contemporary research from science education that document the hostilities that racially and gender‐minoritized students experience in undergraduate and graduate science programs. We find the intersection of these two subfields to be productive for elucidating multilevel, context‐dependent strategies, which can redress the inexcusable and alarming underrepresentation and exclusion of racially minoritized peoples in science programs and careers in the United States. We end by contemplating the ethical question of how science programs, careers, and the broader field would need to change, to keep historically minoritized students from experiencing further material and epistemological violence. We argue that, without this reimagination, even the most effective advising models will only ensure that more racially and gender‐minoritized students are sacrificed on the altar of "equality" for the sake of the economic and geopolitical needs of the state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This framing essay situates the author's experiences with mentoring. This serves as a prelude to the two foundational essays about equity‐centered science education included within this special issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Among the mechanisms of systematic erasure associated with science and science education (e.g., Shea & Sandoval, 2020; Takeuchi & Marin, 2022), the project addressed antiracism (Mills, 2015) along with a discriminatory bias toward multilingual and low-income students as well as their families and communities. However, in April 2019, public health professionals and researchers around the country launched their own science literacy campaign aimed at educating citizens on the science behind the COVID-19 virus and its spread in our communities. Https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21720 o I Negotiating mentoring relationships and supports for Black and Brown early career faculty i by Natalie King & Bhaskar Upadhyay. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21755 o I Mentoring science educators for equity-centered futures i by John Settlage. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21759 Partnering o I Beginning school-university partnerships for transformative social change in science education: Narratives from the field i by Hosun Kang & María González-Howard. The contents of this special issue are the products of a National Science Foundation (NSF)-supported working conference. [Extracted from the article]

In this essay, I explore some of the insights provided in a set of three manuscripts that focus on centering equity in peer review, authored by Bancroft, Ryoo and Miles, Nkrumah and Mutegi, and Marshall and Salter. I consider various aspects of their arguments, highlighting implications for the procedures and norms of journals and funding organizations and questions for further consideration. Drawing on their findings and analyses, I discuss various recommendations, such as the need to change the rules and norms of peer review to be more equitable, to ensure that reviews are free from race, ethnicity, gender, and other kinds of identity‐related biases, to work towards equitable distribution of the resources, such as advising, mentoring, and valuable feedback, that support fair reviewing, and to establish criteria and rubrics that support research that is conducted in collaboration with communities marginalized in science education. In addition, I raise issues for further consideration, including the evolving relationship between "equity" and "merit" with regard to peer review and the need for centering equity in ways that allow for discussion, debate, and development of the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay centers on the voices of leading scholars in science and STEM education on how equity can and should be centered in reviewing proposals for granting organizations. As the decisions made as a result of the reviewing process significantly impact the future directions of the field, we recognize the urgency in considering how equity is considered in this process. Through their experiences, four researchers offer the science and STEM community a call to action. The scholars interviewed highlighted that equitable reviewing and funding research and professional development will require changes within the science education and STEM funding ecosystem. Three overarching themes include (1) changing the ideologies and culture of science and STEM education research funding will require centering the needs of the communities being served; (2) institutions and granting organizations should adopt equity‐focused and holistic rubrics and models; and 3) we each have an individual responsibility to employ equity during the review process. Thus, this essay has the potential to both inspire and provide explicit examples of how we can all center equity as we strive to transform the future of science and STEM education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Across a broad range of disciplines, research has found that inequity is systemic in the journal review process. Collectively, however, this study does not specifically examine racial inequity. Moreover, literature on the peer review process in science education, in particular, does not foreground equity as a subject of study. The present study aims to address this void by examining racial equity in the peer review process with a specific focus on journals in science education. Data are collected from lead editors of major science education journals through the form of interviews, focus groups, and critical arts‐based methods. The two research questions driving data collection are (a) In what ways does the science education journal peer review process promote racial equity? and (b) How are science education journal editors' perceptions of racial inequity reflected in the peer review process? McNair and colleagues' racial equity framework informs the explorations of journal review in science education from the lead editors' perspectives. From our findings, we offer four suggestions for moving toward greater racial equity in the science education peer review process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined how high school students' attitudes toward advanced physics were predicted by their sense of school belonging, and how gender moderated this relationship. The Trends in International Math and Science (TIMSS) 2015 Advanced data, consisting of responses from 12th grade students enrolled in advanced physics courses among nine countries were used for analysis. Results indicated that students' sense of school belonging significantly predicted the extent that students liked learning advanced physics and their valuing of advanced physics and, among Lebanese students, it was the most important predictor. Additionally, the relationship between students' sense of school belonging and liking advanced physics was stronger for males than for females in Norway and Sweden, while the relationship between the sense of school belonging and valuing advanced physics was stronger for males than females in France and Sweden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using evidence of student thinking and performance is crucial to enacting ambitious science teaching because intimate, formative data can be responsive to student ideas about science. However, narratives and policies about assessment and data use do not always position teachers to draw on the breadth and variety of evidence from the classroom to make instructional decisions that foster sensemaking. Thus, understanding whether, when, and how teachers view and use assessment and other forms of student data is critical to understanding classroom interactions and learning. This study explores teachers' baseline assessment conceptions and practices as well as their changes with relation to assessment and data use across a year‐long intervention using a portfolio of classroom assessment artifacts. Middle school science teachers participated in professional development in which they reflected on assessment artifacts in light of nine dimensions of effective science assessment and data‐use practice. Drawing on interviews, as well as baseline and outcome portfolios from the classroom, we noticed that initial conceptions of practice focused on the variety and frequency of assessment. Nine months later, participants' practice showed growth in several dimensions, but differentially among teachers based on their baseline proficiency. Teachers were more likely to show growth in dimensions related to feedback and data use if they had initially showed proficiency in articulating clear learning goals and had previously aligned their assessments to the stated goals. These findings suggest a possible developmental trajectory for improving teachers' assessment and data use practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the article points out, here too, Dr. Klopfer was highly influential regarding the infusion of Nature of Science (NOS) into science education curricula, instruction, and assessment. I first met Leo on his visit to the University of Maryland-College Park Science Teaching Center (STC) in the early 1980s. The comprehensive design of the I Test of Understanding Science i (TOUS) (L. Klopfer & Cooley, 1961; L. E. Klopfer & Cooley, 1963) is for me still one of the best NOS instruments developed The TOUS emerged out the Harvard Project Physics National Science Foundation (NSF) project, which adopted a historical approach for teaching physics. [Extracted from the article]

This study addresses intergenerational learning processes in informal settings by investigating families engaging in science talk and practices during a water quality science workshop led by local science experts. As part of a larger design‐based research study, this analysis examines how modified Think–Pair–Share discussion prompts within the water quality workshop curriculum supported the families' (a) sensemaking strategies and (b) place‐based scientific reasoning about local water sources as they interacted with a community water model. Using sociocultural theories of learning as our foundational basis, we analyzed parent–child interactions and family sensemaking processes that took place in four workshops with 44 h of video data (12 families). Through our analysis, we identified six distinct types of sensemaking conversations that arose during the workshops: (1) family experience connection, (2) rural connection, (3) model contextualizing, (4) parent revoicing, (5) parent questioning, and (6) prediction. We also found that families spatially distributed physical gestures over three media (air, table, community water model) to support different types of sensemaking conversations. Our findings point towards the importance of family discussion prompts in informal programs as a mediational means that connects abstract science topics to local, rural experiences to support family sensemaking practices. Implications for designing family‐focused science workshops in informal settings include designing discussion prompts to spark families' personally relevant connections with science and providing ample physical space for families to gesture during sensemaking conversations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article offers a retrospective synopsis of 70 years of development of a humanistic approach to science education. Instruction using the history of science, for example, provides a rich context for students to learn not only canonical science content on a need‐to‐know basis, but also content from the other domains of humanistic science education, including: the nature of science and scientists, cultural studies, and the multifarious interplay between science/scientists and society. The synopsis leads to the conclusion that instructional materials and student assessment tools developed earlier for teaching the history of science are relevant today. Science–technology–society–environment and socioscientific issues, two of the present six domains of humanistic school science, are given special attention. An example of their teaching materials is described, which illustrates in detail how to organize lessons or units particularly suited for the substantial majority of high school students who would not enroll in any current science classes if not required for graduation. Trends suggested for the future are based on shifts in current global economics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Embodied cognition has been a useful means to support learning in science education. In this article, we describe a model of embodied cognition through analogical mapping that is supported through the participatory simulation and mathematical description of a link and pivot system. We look at the propensity for this model of embodied cognition to support student mechanistic reasoning. While these link and pivot systems provide students with immediate perceptual accessibility to their components, they do not provide perceptual accessibility to the way that forces are transmitted through them. In an afterschool STEM program, students engaged in a participatory simulation (the Rope Walk) of the link and pivot system that allowed them to simulate the parts and forces present. Then, students progressively re‐described these physical experiences as a mathematical system; they then described the simulation and mathematical system as the physical link and pivot system. In this study, this model of embodied cognition was validated through a microgenetic analysis of student talk and gesture during the first two instructional sessions as well as during pre‐ and post‐assessments. These data show that students were supported to construct analogical mappings between three analog conceptual domains: the participatory simulation (the Rope Walk), the physical system (link and pivot system), and the mathematical system (the mathematics of circles). In addition, students made gains on measures of mechanistic reasoning and explanation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In science education, there has been a sustained focus on supporting the emergence of science practices in K–12 and field‐based settings. Recent work has elevated the integral role of emotion in sparking and sustaining such disciplinary practices, deepening the field's understanding of what is entailed in "doing" science. Yet even as we gain this richer understanding of practice, less attention has been given to the places where practice emerges. These places play a critical role in the co‐emergence of emotion and practice, and while separate strands of research have elevated emotion and practice or, alternately, place and practice, rarely has their dynamic relationship been considered together. In this article, I explore this interplay of emotion, place, and practice emergent in children's sampling practices within a multiweek curriculum centered around their schoolyard soil ecosystem. Through a comparative case study analysis of two student pairs using video data, student interviews, and classroom artifacts, my analysis reveals how children's emergent emotion was entangled in their relationships with the schoolyard and life within, shaping not only how they engaged in sampling practices but also what dimensions of the ecological system they attended to. I argue that emotion and place should be central to the design, teaching, and analysis of learning contexts, in turn centering the social and emplaced dimensions of science disciplinary practices for children and scientists alike. Implications for science teaching and learning are discussed, with particular consideration of field‐based sciences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Framework for K‐12 Science Education details new goals to guide improvement of US science education. Among the new goals, the inclusion of engineering core ideas and practices stand out. We report a case study of four 8th‐grade science teachers who chose to integrate engineering core ideas and practices into their science classes by teaching four STEM design challenges (SDC). This study focuses on understanding the goal conflicts arising from these teachers' choice and how they resolve their goal conflicts. Primary data come from semistructured interviews conducted with each teacher. The goal conflicts expressed by our teachers fell into one of two broad categories: pacing conflicts and mandated testing conflicts. Pacing conflicts exist between the goals of teaching the SDCs in full and the goals of following the district‐wide pacing guide and covering all state mandated standards. Mandated testing conflicts were those goal conflicts arising between teaching the SDCs and ensuring that students were successful on officially mandated tests from the state and the district. The science teachers resolved their conflicts through goal balancing, where actions taken to satisfy one goal (teaching the SDCs) allow a person to subsequently pursue actions toward satisfying a conflicting goal. In this study, goal balancing is exhibited by teachers partially completing each SDC before moving on to the next topic. Finally, we discuss these findings in relationship to the existing literature on science teachers' goals and provide implications for science teachers' professional development and for research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nature field trips stand out as pedagogical experiences because of their benefits in science learning, even in early childhood education (ECE). However, previous studies have found that teachers often do not make use of their full educational potential. The present research offers a descriptive exploration of ECE prospective teachers' enactment of nature field trips, detecting the difficulties they encounter and the mistakes they make. To this end, 205 videos were analyzed qualitatively to determine the pedagogical planning of nature field trips proposed and carried out by prospective ECE teachers. The results indicated that most of the participants designed nature field trips in which they could develop conceptual content related to living things through an expository method, with pupils having a passive role. They did not use activities, materials, questions, or evaluation during the trips, and neither did they integrate the trips into their classroom programming. This study adds to an understanding of how prospective teachers perceive nature field trips. Implications are presented for teacher educators working with preservice teachers to build upon prepare them for implementing nature field trips with ECE students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]