Search

Student participation in the science practices is more than following directions to conduct pre-determined experiments and analyze data with expected solutions. This requires classroom shifts that increase the epistemic agency of students: increase student involvement and authority in developing science knowledge and practices, rather than the teacher and textbook serving as sole sources of authority. In previous work, the authors described how three teachers differentially create opportunities for students to act as epistemic agents and to engage in collective knowledge-building work. The descriptive nature of this previous research provided information about what variability can look like in classrooms attempting these reform-oriented pedagogical shifts. This paper extends this prior work by presenting an expanded, but still exploratory analysis of how those three teachers, who participated in the same professional development community and were working with common instructional materials, attempted to support student agency through science practices in a common lesson. The present goal is to use a multi-case study to identify emerging variations in key elements of knowledge and practice for inviting students' epistemic agency, even as teachers work toward specific learning goals. From these cases the research is advanced by building theoretical conjectures that can be explored further in future work about how teachers' choices about collective knowledge building may yield differential opportunities for students to experience epistemic agency.

The ability to develop and use models to explain phenomena is a key component of the "Next Generation Science Standards", and without examples of what modeling instruction looks like in the reality of classrooms, it will be difficult for us as a field to understand how to move forward in designing curricula that foreground the practice in ways that align with the epistemic commitments of modeling. In this article, we illustrate examples drawn from a model-based curriculum development project to problematize and bring to the fore issues and tensions we observed through the course of modeling instruction. In doing so, we argue that instruction that is model-based may not be actualizing modeling as an epistemic practice to support student sensemaking. We suggest that this kind of enactment may be a result of the tensions between viewing models as content to be learned and modeling as a scientific practice in which the end products are not known ahead of time. We discuss the implications of our analysis for teacher learning and curriculum development.

The inclusion of the practice of "developing and using models" in the "Framework for K-12 Science Education" and in the "Next Generation Science Standards" provides an opportunity for educators to examine the role this practice plays in science and how it can be leveraged in a science classroom. Drawing on conceptions of models in the philosophy of science, we bring forward an agent-based account of models and discuss the implications of this view for enacting modeling in science classrooms. Models, according to this account, can only be understood with respect to the aims and intentions of a cognitive agent (models for), not solely in terms of how they represent phenomena in the world (models of). We present this contrast as a heuristic--"models of" versus "models for"--that can be used to help educators notice and interpret how models are positioned in standards, curriculum, and classrooms.

The BIO2010 report provided a compelling argument for the need to create learning experiences for undergraduate biology students that are more authentic to modern science. The report acknowledged the need for research that could help practitioners successfully create and reform biology curricula with this goal in mind. Our objective in this article was to explore how a set of six design heuristics could be used to evaluate the potential of curricula to support productive learning experiences for science students. We drew on data collected during a long-term study of an undergraduate traineeship that introduced students to mathematical modeling in the context of modern biological problems. We present illustrative examples from this curriculum that highlight the ways in which three heuristics-instructor role-modeling, holding students to scientific norms, and providing students with opportunities to practice these norms-consistently supported learning across the curriculum. We present a more detailed comparison of two different curricular modules and explain how differences in student authority, problem structure, and access to resources contributed to differences in productive engagement by students in these modules. We hope that our analysis will help practitioners think in more concrete terms about how to achieve the goals set forth by BIO2010.

There has been increased recognition in the past decades that model-based inquiry (MBI) is a promising approach for cultivating deep understandings by helping students unite phenomena and underlying mechanisms. Although multiple technology tools have been used to improve the effectiveness of MBI, there are not enough detailed examinations of how agent-based programmable modeling (ABPM) tools influence students' MBI learning. The present collective case study sought to contribute by closely investigating ABPM-supported MBI processes for 8th grade students learning about natural selection and adaptation. Eight 8th grade students in groups of 2-3 spent 15 h during a span of 4 weeks collaboratively programming simulations of adaptation based on the natural selection model, using an ABPM tool named NetLogo. The entire programming processes of these learning groups, up to 50 h, were videotaped and then analyzed using mixed methods. Our analysis revealed that the programming task created a context that calls for nine types of MBI actions. These MBI actions were related to both phenomena and the underlying model. Results also showed that students' programming processes took place in consecutive programming cycles and aligned with iterative MBI cycles. A framework for ABPM-supported MBI learning is proposed based upon the findings. Implications in developing MBI instruction involving ABPM tools are discussed.

With the adoption of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in English Language Arts (ELA) and math and the release and beginning adoptions of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), teachers, schools, and districts are clamoring for professional learning opportunities to refine and re-tool teaching to bring it in line with the reform visions in these documents. This increased need for professional development (PD) raises the question of the capacity of current systems of PD as well as the effectiveness of the most commonly used approaches. The nature of the new demands of these reforms and the scale of the need means that PD will have to use innovative approaches to handle the type of complex learning called for in these reforms, and will have to do so at scale (Wilson, 2013). Many may see online learning environments as part of a solution to address the scale issues, because of the ability to use this technology to reach broad audiences across a wide range of time-frames. There is interest in online or technology-mediated environments that promise certain kinds of functionality to support teachers in the complex work they are being asked to do (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). Wilson (2013) identifies the need to "harness new technologies and social media to make high-quality science PD available to all teachers" as one of the grand challenges in science education. In this commentary, the authors respond to the previous month's article about professional development, praising its contribution but calling for more nuanced consideration of specific program designs to support adoption of a new science curriculum. Specifically, they argue that a corollary to the challenge of access is the challenge of developing research-based design principles to guide the ongoing development, implementation, and evaluation efforts in online PD to meet these new, complex demands in teacher learning.

At its core, science is about making sense of the world around us. Therefore, science education should engage students in that sense-making process. Helping students make sense of disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts by engaging in scientific practices is the key innovation of the "Next Generation Science Standards" ("NGSS"). These standards make explicit the various sensemaking practices of science and link those practices tightly to content learning. To move toward the vision of the NGSS, teachers need clear examples of what this engagement looks like in the classroom. This article shows how developing and using models can anchor the other practices identified in the "NGSS." Models in science serve as the functional unit of scientific thought. The model--broadly defined as a set of ideas about how something in the world works--motivates and constrains the kinds of "questions" one asks about phenomena, the kinds of "investigations" one carries out, and the ways of "analyzing and interpreting data"; and, ultimately, the model guides any explanations for phenomena that one develops. Moreover, a learning environment centered on models and modeling can support a range of opportunities for "gathering and communicating information," engaging in "argumentation" and, in some cases, applying "mathematical reasoning." (The terms in quotes are the practices as defined in the "NGSS".) To illustrate the potential for the practice of developing and using models to serve as an anchor for all of the "NGSS" practices, the authors present here a coherent unit on natural selection. It is their hope that this article will show that a core model can anchor science instruction that includes all of the practices called for in the "NGSS." Anchoring the practices to one another in service of developing deep content understanding is important to maintaining strong coherence in a lesson sequence. It also prioritizes and operationalizes the sense-making process so central to science that is at the heart of the "Next Generation Science Standards."

Modeling, like inquiry more generally, is not a single method, but rather a complex suite of strategies. Philosophers of biology, citing the diverse aims, interests, and disciplinary cultures of biologists, argue that modeling is best understood in the context of its epistemic aims and cognitive payoffs. In the science education literature, modeling has been discussed in a variety of ways, but often without explicit reference to the diversity of roles models play in scientific practice. We aim to expand and bring clarity to the myriad uses of models in science by presenting a framework from philosopher of biology Jay Odenbaugh that describes five pragmatic strategies of model use in the biological sciences. We then present illustrative examples of each of these roles from an empirical study of an undergraduate biological modeling curriculum, which highlight how students used models to help them frame their research question, explore ideas, and refine their conceptual understanding in an educational setting. Our aim is to begin to explicate the definition of modeling in science in a way that will allow educators and curriculum developers to make informed choices about how and for what purpose modeling enters science classrooms.

On several levels it can be said that the act of modelling in science is inherently an argumentative act. That is, in virtually all aspects of modelling, from developing a question to judging between competing models that might answer that question, an individual is engaged in persuasive acts. Those acts may be private or public. They may be mental, written or oral, but they are about judging ideas and making sense of them; convincing oneself or others that the ideas and ways of looking at and explaining a phenomenon are useful. These acts are what scientists find exciting. They are what make science intellectually interesting and challenging. Inviting students into this practice is one way to help them learn both the content and process of science. This paper introduces a framework that is attentive to the research on how people learn while simultaneously pushing for curriculum and instruction that engages students in elements of the practice of science. We explore how this framework can be used to foster argumentation by describing the theoretical underpinnings of the framework and using classroom examples to illustrate the utility of the framework for promoting argumentation. (Contains 1 figure.)

As science teachers at a suburban California high school, the authors were concerned about the lab report conclusions written by their upper-level chemistry, biology, and ecology students--which were consistently of poor quality. Their work lacked inferences derived from data and support for their concluding statements. Working as part of a collaborative project with the University of California at Davis, they formed a teacher research group to investigate this matter. This article describes the group's efforts and its implications for the classroom. (Contains 5 figures.)

This paper reports on the findings of a case study that investigated the interaction of the agendas and practices of students, teachers, and zoo educators during a class field trip to a zoo. The study reports on findings of the analysis of two case classes of students and their perceptions of their learning experiences during the field trip. The goals, expectations, and perceived outcomes of the trip for students, their classroom teachers, and the zoo educators were elicited through interviews, surveys, student work, and observations. Both cases demonstrated how students placed high value and importance on social interactions with their peers. In addition, classroom teachers' pedagogical practices and the learning agendas they held for their students had a significant influence on students' subsequent learning and perceptions of the experience. This was in contrast to the zoo educators' practices and agendas that appeared not to be significant influences on student learning and perceptions. Implications for field trip planning and implementation are discussed. (Contains 4 footnotes.)

Much has been made in recent years of inquiry approaches to science education and the promise of such instruction to alleviate some of the ills of science education, yet in some ways this construct is still unclear to many in the field. In this paper we explore one view of inquiry in science that is based on the development, use, assessment, and revision of models and related explanations. Because modeling plays a central role in scientific inquiry it should be a prominent feature of students' science education. We present a framework based on this view that can serve as a guide to curriculum development and instructional decision-making with the goal of creating classroom environments that mirror important aspects of scientific practice. Specifically, the framework allows us to emphasize that scientists: engage in inquiry other than controlled experiments, use existing models in their inquiries, engage in inquiry that leads to revised models, use models to construct explanations, use models to unify their understanding, and engage in argumentation. Here, we discuss how these practices can be incorporated into science classrooms and illustrate that discussion with examples from our research classrooms. (Contains 1 figure and 2 notes.)

Teacher research--often called "action research"--is an intentional and systematic inquiry into one's own classroom practice with the goal of improved student learning (Cochran-Smith and Lytle 1993). In this article, the authors present a teacher research project undertaken to improve student understanding of the gas laws in a high school chemistry class. It addresses both the product of this teacher research project--insights into the teaching of gas laws--and the process and potential power of this approach. (Contains 7 figures.)

When students are given opportunities to use their knowledge to explain interesting and appropriate evolutionary phenomena, their potential for understanding evolutionary concepts increases. In this article, the authors describe a nine-week high school evolutionary biology course designed to engage students in using Darwin's natural selection model, which provides a rich context not only to reason about evolutionary concepts such as variation and differential survival but also to use those concepts to explain changes in populations over time. In developing this course, the authors attempted to redefine the expectations for students in evolutionary biology and to provide a picture of what curriculum designed with these goals in mind might entail. Students in this course were able to reason and argue from data, develop their own explanations for natural phenomena, and evaluate the hypotheses of their peers--in sharp contrast to students in traditional courses who often leave with a memorized list of facts and an "understanding" of evolution as a belief system rather than as a reasonable scientific explanation of phenomena and species change. (Contains 1 figure.)

Describes the commitments and research that went into the design of a 9-week high school course in evolutionary biology designed to bring students to an understanding of the practice of evolutionary biology by engaging them in developing, elaborating, and using one of the discipline's most important explanatory models. (Contains 39 references.) (Author/YDS)