Search

This dissertation explores the intersection between scientific practices and political economy from the time of Maria Theresa's and Joseph II's reforms in the Habsburg State of Milan to the Cisalpina and Italian Republics. It is structured in four parts, corresponding to the themes of "appropriations", "technologies", "spaces" and "soils". Each of these parts comprises of two chapters, with the exception of the last one on "soils". Part I, named "Appropriations", explores how the Società Patriotica took on board the practices and debates which originated in the context of French Physiocracy, such as economic milling and the question of the scale of land-holdings, and analyses how they were appropriated to fit the political economy of the State of Milan. Part II, titled "Technologies", takes into account the attitudes of Milanese reformers, public officers and naturalists towards mechanical arts and, in general, towards technology for the achievement of the felicità and utilità pubblica. Part III of the dissertation has been named "Spaces". It focuses on the travels of naturalists Domenico Vandelli, Paolo Sangiorgio and Lazzaro Spallanzani, using them as starting points to examine the significance of natural history practices, such as travelling and collecting, for an understanding of contemporary political economy. Part IV, titled "Soils", examines a series of texts about the management and making of salnitro, showing their relevance in the context of the newly founded Italian Republic. Overall, the thesis aims to acknowledge the complexity, as well as the intellectual debts, of the production of political economy and scientific knowledge in the State of Milan, and pushes forward the debate on the Italian Enlightenment, by opposing those narratives which have represented it as a marginal and peripheral case in the broader and more "international" European Enlightenment.

The landscape of undergraduate biology education has been shaped by decades of reform efforts calling for instruction to integrate core concepts and scientific skills as a means of helping students become proficient in the discipline. Assessments can be used to make inferences about how these reform efforts have translated into changes in department curriculum and course practices. Such changes can be measured using student scores on researcher-developed programmatic and concept assessments. Scores on these assessments are often assumed to be accurate representations of student biology content knowledge, but my work indicates that the validity of these interpretations may be threatened when students complete the assessments in low-stakes contexts that are more likely to elicit low test-taking effort. Score validity is also threatened in high-stakes out-of-class contexts in which students may be incentivized to leverage external resources to increase their score. My findings suggest that departments and instructors using programmatic and concept assessments to evaluate the progress of their curriculum and courses in meeting the goals of reform effort should carefully interpret scores in light of the conditions in which students completed the assessment. The impacts of reform efforts may also be detected in the types of skills and content that are assessed on course exams. I studied the skills and content of lower-division undergraduate biology exams in the context of a three-dimensional framework consisting of scientific practices, interdisciplinary crosscutting concepts, and disciplinary core ideas. I found that very few exam items were three-dimensional, primarily due to the low number of items assessing scientific practices. Although there were few three-dimensional items, those items were more likely to use a constructed-response format and assess higher-order cognitive skills compared to items not aligned with all three dimensions. To achieve the goals of reform efforts in undergraduate biology education, my research indicates instructors may need time, resources, and training for writing and grading three-dimensional assessments. Altogether, this dissertation sheds critical insight into the process and content of evaluating student learning, thereby refining our understanding of the impact of education reforms. Advisor: Brian A. Couch

Although numerous studies have documented the benefits of using scientific practices in K-12 education, many in-service teachers continue to use traditional pedagogical practices. In order to address the underlying deficiencies in teacher pedagogical design capacity (PDC) for practices, we developed a lesson study (LS) based professional learning (PL) program, which we implemented at a low socio-economic status (SES) school district. Using classical content analysis and supplementary assessments, I investigated the impact this LS based PL program had on teacher PDC for scientific practices (particularly the practice of argumentation), student argumentation competency, and teacher self-efficacy. My results demonstrate that teacher PDC for the several scientific practices, particularly scientific modeling, argumentation, and communicating findings, increased due to our PL program. However, student argumentation competency and teacher self-efficacy remained stagnant, possibly due to the short timescale (1 year) of our intervention and the lack of support from upper-level administrators.

Recent reform calls for a more comprehensive approach to science education that positions learners as constructors of knowledge via scientific practices (NRC, 2012; Osborne, 2014). This 'practice turn' shifts from passive science learning to incorporating science actions with epistemic thinking (Duschl & Grandy, 2013; Ford & Forman, 2006; Osborne, 2014; Shouse, Schweingruber, & Duschl, 2007). Teachers are often underprepared in understanding the nuances of scientific practices, and frequently struggle with supporting students in meaningful practice engagement (Abd-El-Khalick & Akerson, 2004; Crawford, 1999; Davis, Petish, & Smithey, 2006; Duschl & Gitomer, 1997). Here, I draw upon the Berland et al. Epistemologies in Practice framework to define meaningfulness as being both authentic to the discipline of science and relevant to students: not only are students attending to epistemic thinking as they engage in a practice, but they are also buying into the need to do things that way (2016). In this dissertation, I examine a classroom community (Mrs. L and her students) across three eighth grade modeling units to answer the research question How does a teacher support students in a modeling curriculum? Specifically, I want to know how Mrs. L and the students co-construct meaning around a practice in the classroom and then how students apply that meaning to their final models. Based on the data collected in each of the units, I argue that meaningfulness co-constructed around a practice in a classroom setting can take a variety of forms that maintain authenticity to the discipline of science and relevance to students. Furthermore, I argue that this meaningfulness can be abandoned as students construct their final models when the activity is approached as a product rather than as a scientific practice. Together, the findings from this multiple case study inform a larger body of research examining more effective supports for meaningful modeling and more productive approaches to modeling in the classroom and beyond.

Recently, the National Research Council developed A Framework for K-12 Science Education (NRC, 2012), to support a new vision of science education. The Framework (2012) focuses on three integrated dimensions--disciplinary core ideas, crosscutting concepts, and scientific and engineering practices which is different than traditional ways of learning science. I focused on students' engagement in scientific practices, attention to epistemological practices (EIP) that guide students' construction, evaluation and revision of knowledge products. I examined how students EIP's changed over time and across contexts with respect to different knowledge product types (models and explanations). I present data from 103, 6th grade students attending two Midwest suburban elementary schools. I collected written embedded assessments and conducted semi-structured interviews. The Science Practices Group has identified four epistemological considerations that comprise students' epistemology in practice-type of account, generality, audience, and justification. I found that students exhibited growth for one of the four epistemological considerations. Students increased from descriptive to more mechanistic explanations (type of account) for modeling and explanation construction. Audience, generality, and justification epistemic considerations decreased over time or remained constant. These findings may suggest that supports from classroom instruction norms and curriculum enactment may affect use of these epistemological considerations in the classroom. Overall, I do see promise in using the epistemological considerations as supportive tools for students when making sense of the practice and engaging in meaningful science learning.

Despite wide research-based support for the implementation of inquiry-based science instruction, very few studies have closely examined its enactment across varied modes of instruction. Such studies can contribute to a finer understanding of the knowledge teachers must have in order to implement high-quality inquiry-based science instruction. This dissertation study investigated the enactment of three modes of inquiry-based science instruction by three guest teachers who were university-based researchers. The 50 fourth grade student participants were matched on achievement and prior content knowledge and randomly assigned to one of six small groups across three conditions employing different modes of inquiry-based science instruction: first-hand investigation, second-hand investigation, and an interplay of first- and second-hand investigation (Palincsar and Magnusson, 2001). Children in the first-hand investigation condition directly manipulated scientific phenomena, collected and reported data, and used these data to make knowledge claims. Children in the second-hand investigation condition studied the phenomena by following the investigations of a fictitious scientist who documents her study in an innovative notebook text. Children in the interplay condition experienced an interplay of the first- and second-hand investigations. 
 Guided by sociocognitive theories of learning, the first phase of data analysis identified the differential opportunities for students to engage with scientific practices and conceptual claims across the modes of instruction. The findings from this analytical phase showed that in the context of this study, instruction featuring second-hand investigations provided students with richer opportunities for engaging with scientific practices and conceptual claims as compared to instruction featuring first-hand investigation. Following this, three sets of contrastive case studies were analyzed that demonstrated how opportunities for learning were differentially mediated across conditions. A cross-case analysis integrated a logic of inquiry focusing on the following issues: participant structures, children’s connections to prior experiences, and argumentation. The findings from this analytical phase illuminated particular affordances of the second-hand investigation instructional mode and the way that these affordances were brought to life by specific teacher moves. Thus, the study shows how the interplay between curricular affordances and teacher moves can collectively lead to rich scientific literacy learning opportunities for upper elementary students.