Pub Date : 2021-08-19DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2021.1969168
Kate Davis, A. Fitzgerald, M. Power, T. Leach, Neil Martin, Stephanie Piper, Retd Singh, Shelley Dunlop
ABSTRACT STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) clubs are gaining momentum as a means for engaging students in STEM-related activities. Despite this growth, there have been limited attempts to examine the conditions that inform practice in these informal educational spaces. This paper addresses that gap through a comprehensive literature review of empirical and practitioner publications, with a focus on synthesising the approaches that support STEM clubs to be effective learning environments. In total, 33 papers were included in this review. Through a rigorous literature review process, the research team identified a number of key focus areas that support the achievement of learning outcomes and programme sustainability. These focus areas are grouped into three key themes – club management, environment, and program evaluation – that STEM club practitioners should attend to in order to ensure a well-informed approach. Within in each theme a number of sub-dimensions were identified, which provide practical insights and lived examples of how these conditions can be enacted within STEM clubs in ways that speak to quality. The evidence-based findings presented in this paper can be used by practitioners to guide STEM club practice. Further, the paper identifies where research is required to explore contemporary practice in informal education settings.
{"title":"Understanding the conditions informing successful STEM clubs: What does the evidence base tell us?","authors":"Kate Davis, A. Fitzgerald, M. Power, T. Leach, Neil Martin, Stephanie Piper, Retd Singh, Shelley Dunlop","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2021.1969168","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1969168","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) clubs are gaining momentum as a means for engaging students in STEM-related activities. Despite this growth, there have been limited attempts to examine the conditions that inform practice in these informal educational spaces. This paper addresses that gap through a comprehensive literature review of empirical and practitioner publications, with a focus on synthesising the approaches that support STEM clubs to be effective learning environments. In total, 33 papers were included in this review. Through a rigorous literature review process, the research team identified a number of key focus areas that support the achievement of learning outcomes and programme sustainability. These focus areas are grouped into three key themes – club management, environment, and program evaluation – that STEM club practitioners should attend to in order to ensure a well-informed approach. Within in each theme a number of sub-dimensions were identified, which provide practical insights and lived examples of how these conditions can be enacted within STEM clubs in ways that speak to quality. The evidence-based findings presented in this paper can be used by practitioners to guide STEM club practice. Further, the paper identifies where research is required to explore contemporary practice in informal education settings.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"59 1","pages":"1 - 23"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2021-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49153619","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-02DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2021.1963580
A. Ogegbo, U. Ramnarain
ABSTRACT Computational thinking (CT) has been described as an essential skill that should be learned by everyone and can, therefore, be included in their skill set. Computational thinking uses essential principles in computer science for solving problems, understanding complex systems, and human behaviour. This way of thinking has significant consequences for teaching and learning science subjects at elementary and high school levels. In this review, we analyse and discuss the results from 23 studies and highlight the methodology, different strategies, and assessment practices used to promote the integration of computational thinking within science classrooms. We also give an overview of how computational thinking is being taught in science classrooms and describe tools available for teaching computational thinking in science instruction. Findings showed the value of using modelling-based pedagogy in incorporating key computational thinking skills within science instruction and suggests that educators should deploy effective technology tools to enhance the deductive and inductive teaching of science concepts using computational thinking framework.
{"title":"A systematic review of computational thinking in science classrooms","authors":"A. Ogegbo, U. Ramnarain","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2021.1963580","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1963580","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Computational thinking (CT) has been described as an essential skill that should be learned by everyone and can, therefore, be included in their skill set. Computational thinking uses essential principles in computer science for solving problems, understanding complex systems, and human behaviour. This way of thinking has significant consequences for teaching and learning science subjects at elementary and high school levels. In this review, we analyse and discuss the results from 23 studies and highlight the methodology, different strategies, and assessment practices used to promote the integration of computational thinking within science classrooms. We also give an overview of how computational thinking is being taught in science classrooms and describe tools available for teaching computational thinking in science instruction. Findings showed the value of using modelling-based pedagogy in incorporating key computational thinking skills within science instruction and suggests that educators should deploy effective technology tools to enhance the deductive and inductive teaching of science concepts using computational thinking framework.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"58 1","pages":"203 - 230"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2021-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2021.1963580","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49162521","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-28DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2021.1944716
Tore van der Leij, Lucy Avraamidou, A. Wals, M. Goedhart
ABSTRACT This review study synthesises 28 empirical research articles emphasising the learning of morality aspects in the context of addressing socioscientific issues (SSI) in secondary science education. The key interrelated questions we seek to address in this study are how morality is conceptualised in the science classroom in the light of emerging sustainability issues and how it can be developed. We used the Four Component Model of Morality to create a knowledge base for how morality has been conceptualised in the literature on secondary science education and how it can be developed. The findings of this review study show that not all studies have used concrete, explicit conceptualisations of morality and that the role of sense of place and the situatedness of morality have often been neglected. It also emerged that studies focusing on students’ moral character and action-taking were underrepresented. We recommend that further research be carried out on the interrelationships between moral character and enacted moral reasoning. The review also reveals a gap between morality research and teaching. Based on the outcomes of this review, we propose a set of recommendations aimed at guiding and encouraging students’ morality within secondary science education.
{"title":"Supporting Secondary Students’ Morality Development in Science Education","authors":"Tore van der Leij, Lucy Avraamidou, A. Wals, M. Goedhart","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2021.1944716","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1944716","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This review study synthesises 28 empirical research articles emphasising the learning of morality aspects in the context of addressing socioscientific issues (SSI) in secondary science education. The key interrelated questions we seek to address in this study are how morality is conceptualised in the science classroom in the light of emerging sustainability issues and how it can be developed. We used the Four Component Model of Morality to create a knowledge base for how morality has been conceptualised in the literature on secondary science education and how it can be developed. The findings of this review study show that not all studies have used concrete, explicit conceptualisations of morality and that the role of sense of place and the situatedness of morality have often been neglected. It also emerged that studies focusing on students’ moral character and action-taking were underrepresented. We recommend that further research be carried out on the interrelationships between moral character and enacted moral reasoning. The review also reveals a gap between morality research and teaching. Based on the outcomes of this review, we propose a set of recommendations aimed at guiding and encouraging students’ morality within secondary science education.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"58 1","pages":"141 - 181"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2021.1944716","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46416758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-15DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2021.1933354
G. W. Wright, Soonhye Park
ABSTRACT One response to a pedagogical shift towards student-centred and active learning approaches to promote student learning in STEM is the flipped classroom. However, there has been inconsistency in the design and implementation of the flipped classroom and its impact on student learning. This review systematically analysed 30 empirical studies on flipped classrooms in formal, K-16 science and maths classrooms to understand theoretical underpinnings leading to different approaches to flipped classrooms and the impact of flipped classrooms on student learning in science and maths classrooms. The selected studies were qualitatively analysed, and the results showed that: (1) there is more published literature on the flipped classroom identified in post-secondary science and mathematics classrooms, (2) the design of the flipped classroom is rarely grounded in theoretical frameworks especially in science classrooms, and (3) the flipped classroom has an overall positive effect on students’ science and maths learning. This study highlights the importance of using explicit theoretical frameworks aligned with contemporary learning theories to guide the design, implementation, and evaluation of the flipped classroom. Additionally, there is a need for future research to utilise design-based methodologies to maximise the positive impact of the flipped classroom on student learning.
{"title":"The effects of flipped classrooms on K-16 students’ science and math achievement: a systematic review","authors":"G. W. Wright, Soonhye Park","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2021.1933354","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1933354","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT One response to a pedagogical shift towards student-centred and active learning approaches to promote student learning in STEM is the flipped classroom. However, there has been inconsistency in the design and implementation of the flipped classroom and its impact on student learning. This review systematically analysed 30 empirical studies on flipped classrooms in formal, K-16 science and maths classrooms to understand theoretical underpinnings leading to different approaches to flipped classrooms and the impact of flipped classrooms on student learning in science and maths classrooms. The selected studies were qualitatively analysed, and the results showed that: (1) there is more published literature on the flipped classroom identified in post-secondary science and mathematics classrooms, (2) the design of the flipped classroom is rarely grounded in theoretical frameworks especially in science classrooms, and (3) the flipped classroom has an overall positive effect on students’ science and maths learning. This study highlights the importance of using explicit theoretical frameworks aligned with contemporary learning theories to guide the design, implementation, and evaluation of the flipped classroom. Additionally, there is a need for future research to utilise design-based methodologies to maximise the positive impact of the flipped classroom on student learning.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"58 1","pages":"95 - 136"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2021-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2021.1933354","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49544564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-08DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2021.1913321
D. Peart
ABSTRACT Science and drawing have been paired for hundreds of years, and this synergy is still prevalent in research investigating the role of drawing for developing and assessing understanding. However, despite research at the primary and secondary levels of education, there is limited research on whether drawing facilitates learning at the undergraduate level, particularly in human biology. This subject is specifically important to focus on as it can be a core subject on some multidisciplinary programmes that do not require a science background at entry. The literature reviewed in this paper highlights that drawing tasks are well received by students and that they perceive the tasks to be helpful for their understanding. There is also some evidence that it might improve learning. However, this cannot be concluded with confidence due to some limitations with respect to comparison groups, including such a group being absent, using retrospective cohorts as a control, and not controlling for instruction between groups. Furthermore, some of the reported improvements in tests are practically very small. More work is warranted in this area as there is a risk that misconceptions can be passed on to students and between students using this type of teaching activity.
{"title":"Hand drawing as a tool to facilitate understanding in undergraduate human biology: a critical review of the literature and future perspectives","authors":"D. Peart","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2021.1913321","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1913321","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Science and drawing have been paired for hundreds of years, and this synergy is still prevalent in research investigating the role of drawing for developing and assessing understanding. However, despite research at the primary and secondary levels of education, there is limited research on whether drawing facilitates learning at the undergraduate level, particularly in human biology. This subject is specifically important to focus on as it can be a core subject on some multidisciplinary programmes that do not require a science background at entry. The literature reviewed in this paper highlights that drawing tasks are well received by students and that they perceive the tasks to be helpful for their understanding. There is also some evidence that it might improve learning. However, this cannot be concluded with confidence due to some limitations with respect to comparison groups, including such a group being absent, using retrospective cohorts as a control, and not controlling for instruction between groups. Furthermore, some of the reported improvements in tests are practically very small. More work is warranted in this area as there is a risk that misconceptions can be passed on to students and between students using this type of teaching activity.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"58 1","pages":"81 - 93"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2021.1913321","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45709461","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-13DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2021.1897931
Kathleen A. Weiss, M. McDermott, B. Hand
ABSTRACT Educational initiatives in multiple disciplinary areas call for student engagement in the practice of argumentation (CCSSI, 2010a, 2010b; Mullis & Martin, 2017; NGSS Lead States, 2013; OECD, 2018). In science education, immersive argument-based inquiry (ABI) is one category of approaches which integrates argumentation in all classroom activity in order to support conceptual understanding in science. Previous research has reported details of specific immersive ABI approaches but has failed to summarise the characteristics common to all approaches categorised this way and the critical components underlying the learning environments supporting these approaches. This study identified common elements of immersive ABI learning environments through a systematic literature review of 16 existing approaches. Open and axial coding led to the identification of three categories of common elements, including student actions, teacher actions, and generative opportunities. Implications and potential steps to build further understanding of the common elements are discussed.
{"title":"Characterising immersive argument-based inquiry learning environments in school-based education: a systematic literature review","authors":"Kathleen A. Weiss, M. McDermott, B. Hand","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2021.1897931","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1897931","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Educational initiatives in multiple disciplinary areas call for student engagement in the practice of argumentation (CCSSI, 2010a, 2010b; Mullis & Martin, 2017; NGSS Lead States, 2013; OECD, 2018). In science education, immersive argument-based inquiry (ABI) is one category of approaches which integrates argumentation in all classroom activity in order to support conceptual understanding in science. Previous research has reported details of specific immersive ABI approaches but has failed to summarise the characteristics common to all approaches categorised this way and the critical components underlying the learning environments supporting these approaches. This study identified common elements of immersive ABI learning environments through a systematic literature review of 16 existing approaches. Open and axial coding led to the identification of three categories of common elements, including student actions, teacher actions, and generative opportunities. Implications and potential steps to build further understanding of the common elements are discussed.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"58 1","pages":"15 - 47"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2021-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2021.1897931","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44183034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-10DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2021.1897932
Ron E. Gray, Scott P. McDonald, David Stroupe
ABSTRACT This article explores how scholars have framed studies of preservice science teacher (PST) knowledge and learning over the past twelve years. We examined relevant studies between 2008 and 2020, coding them by theoretical perspective (cognitive or sociocultural), knowledge perspective (deficit or asset), and teaching level (elementary, secondary, or both) of the PSTs in the study. We found patterns between knowledge and theoretical perspective use, perspective use over time, and differences between studies of elementary and secondary level PSTs. We conclude with a proposed model of theoretical and knowledge perspectives as seen in the reviewed studies as well as further questions for the field.
{"title":"What you find depends on how you see: examining asset and deficit perspectives of preservice science teachers’ knowledge and learning","authors":"Ron E. Gray, Scott P. McDonald, David Stroupe","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2021.1897932","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1897932","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article explores how scholars have framed studies of preservice science teacher (PST) knowledge and learning over the past twelve years. We examined relevant studies between 2008 and 2020, coding them by theoretical perspective (cognitive or sociocultural), knowledge perspective (deficit or asset), and teaching level (elementary, secondary, or both) of the PSTs in the study. We found patterns between knowledge and theoretical perspective use, perspective use over time, and differences between studies of elementary and secondary level PSTs. We conclude with a proposed model of theoretical and knowledge perspectives as seen in the reviewed studies as well as further questions for the field.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"58 1","pages":"49 - 80"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2021-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2021.1897932","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48622784","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-07DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2021.1897930
M. W. Comarú, Renato Matos Lopes, L. Braga, Fábio Batista Mota, Cecília Galvão
ABSTRACT This article aims to map the scientific production concerning the inclusion of people with disabilities in Science Education to promote a reflection on the production of this area. Bibliometric analysis is used to help understand what stage of research a particular subject is at. Publications on the topic indexed at the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS) were evaluated. A total of 119 articles published between 2009 and July 2019 were selected as dealing specifically with the subject. An increase in the number of articles associating Science teaching (ST) and Inclusive Education (IE) was noted. The journals that published the most, the most productive authors in the area and their collaboration networks were identified. A content analysis of the research was also carried out and the main investigated topics were pointed out. Educational levels, types of disabilities, central themes and specific science areas prevailing in the mapped research were also indicated. We conclude that, despite the growing number of articles, scientific production associating SE and IE is still small, concentrated, and not shared with the scientific community through scientific education journals, and that most research is focused on the use of methodologies and resources, and not on their development.
摘要本文旨在绘制残疾人科学教育的科学生产图谱，以促进对这一领域生产的反思。文献计量学分析用于帮助理解某一特定主题所处的研究阶段。在Web of Science Core Collection (WoS)索引中对该主题的出版物进行了评估。2009年至2019年7月期间发表的119篇文章被选为专门讨论该主题的文章。注意到，将科学教学(ST)和全纳教育(IE)联系起来的文章数量有所增加。确定了发表论文最多的期刊，该领域最多产的作者及其合作网络。并对研究内容进行了分析，指出了研究的主要课题。还指出了教育水平、残疾类型、中心主题和地图研究中普遍存在的具体科学领域。我们得出的结论是，尽管文章数量不断增加，但与SE和IE相关的科学成果仍然很少，而且集中，没有通过科学教育期刊与科学界分享，而且大多数研究都集中在方法和资源的使用上，而不是它们的发展。
{"title":"A bibliometric and descriptive analysis of inclusive education in science education","authors":"M. W. Comarú, Renato Matos Lopes, L. Braga, Fábio Batista Mota, Cecília Galvão","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2021.1897930","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1897930","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article aims to map the scientific production concerning the inclusion of people with disabilities in Science Education to promote a reflection on the production of this area. Bibliometric analysis is used to help understand what stage of research a particular subject is at. Publications on the topic indexed at the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS) were evaluated. A total of 119 articles published between 2009 and July 2019 were selected as dealing specifically with the subject. An increase in the number of articles associating Science teaching (ST) and Inclusive Education (IE) was noted. The journals that published the most, the most productive authors in the area and their collaboration networks were identified. A content analysis of the research was also carried out and the main investigated topics were pointed out. Educational levels, types of disabilities, central themes and specific science areas prevailing in the mapped research were also indicated. We conclude that, despite the growing number of articles, scientific production associating SE and IE is still small, concentrated, and not shared with the scientific community through scientific education journals, and that most research is focused on the use of methodologies and resources, and not on their development.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"57 1","pages":"241 - 263"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2021-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2021.1897930","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46119501","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2020.1755803
K. Chan, Lihua Xu, Rebecca Cooper, A. Berry, J. V. van Driel
ABSTRACT In recent years, teacher noticing has emerged as a construct to capture the dynamic and situational aspects of teaching expertise that underlies teachers’ in-the-moment teaching decisions and actions. In mathematics education research, in particular, teacher noticing has been studied to understand how teachers attend to, and make sense of, students’ mathematical thinking and reasoning. This construct has recently found its way into the science education literature. This paper reviews how the construct of teacher noticing has been understood and empirically investigated in the science education literature. We reviewed 29 empirical studies that focused on science teachers’ noticing and analysed how teacher noticing was defined and conceptualised in terms of its constituent components in these studies as well as the range of approaches used to investigate teacher noticing. Our analysis highlights how the original understanding of, and underlying assumptions about, teacher noticing have shifted as the construct has been imported into the science education literature. This review raises issues related to the investigation of teacher noticing and discusses how the findings of these studies can advance our existing knowledge of science teaching expertise. Finally, we propose directions for future research in this emerging field of research.
{"title":"Teacher noticing in science education: do you see what I see?","authors":"K. Chan, Lihua Xu, Rebecca Cooper, A. Berry, J. V. van Driel","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2020.1755803","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2020.1755803","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In recent years, teacher noticing has emerged as a construct to capture the dynamic and situational aspects of teaching expertise that underlies teachers’ in-the-moment teaching decisions and actions. In mathematics education research, in particular, teacher noticing has been studied to understand how teachers attend to, and make sense of, students’ mathematical thinking and reasoning. This construct has recently found its way into the science education literature. This paper reviews how the construct of teacher noticing has been understood and empirically investigated in the science education literature. We reviewed 29 empirical studies that focused on science teachers’ noticing and analysed how teacher noticing was defined and conceptualised in terms of its constituent components in these studies as well as the range of approaches used to investigate teacher noticing. Our analysis highlights how the original understanding of, and underlying assumptions about, teacher noticing have shifted as the construct has been imported into the science education literature. This review raises issues related to the investigation of teacher noticing and discusses how the findings of these studies can advance our existing knowledge of science teaching expertise. Finally, we propose directions for future research in this emerging field of research.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"57 1","pages":"1 - 44"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2020.1755803","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46926266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-05DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2020.1824472
Raoul Sommeillier, Kathleen M. Quinlan, F. Robert
ABSTRACT We propose a new instructional theory, the Domain of Validity (DoV) Framework, which offers a new way forward for designing teaching for conceptual change, while also resolving conflicts between existing theories related to common, difficult-to-change conceptions students have about particular scientific topics. We propose that knowledge consists of two connected elements: a model and a domain of validity (or DoV). Foregrounding the notion of DoV for given models allows us to reconceptualise and diagnose many problematic preconceptions as examples of an oversized DoV. Mapping the different elements of knowledge – both the model and its domain of validity – allows teachers to pinpoint precisely the cognitive conflict that students need to confront in a conceptual change approach to teaching. We highlight the instructional implications related to these scientific learning difficulties and conclude by proposing particular teaching strategies based on this new framework, emphasising the domains of validity of particular scientific models.
本文提出了一种新的教学理论——效度域框架(Domain of Validity Framework, DoV)，它为概念转变的教学设计提供了新的思路，同时也解决了现有理论之间的冲突，这些理论涉及学生对特定科学主题的常见的、难以改变的概念。我们提出知识由两个相连的元素组成:一个模型和一个有效域(DoV)。在给定模型中突出DoV的概念使我们能够重新定义和诊断许多有问题的先入为主的概念，例如超大DoV。绘制知识的不同元素——既包括模型，也包括它的有效性领域——允许教师精确地指出学生在概念改变的教学方法中需要面对的认知冲突。我们强调了与这些科学学习困难相关的教学含义，并在此基础上提出了特定的教学策略，强调了特定科学模型的有效性领域。
{"title":"Domain of validity framework: a new instructional theory for addressing students’ preconceptions in science and engineering","authors":"Raoul Sommeillier, Kathleen M. Quinlan, F. Robert","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2020.1824472","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2020.1824472","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We propose a new instructional theory, the Domain of Validity (DoV) Framework, which offers a new way forward for designing teaching for conceptual change, while also resolving conflicts between existing theories related to common, difficult-to-change conceptions students have about particular scientific topics. We propose that knowledge consists of two connected elements: a model and a domain of validity (or DoV). Foregrounding the notion of DoV for given models allows us to reconceptualise and diagnose many problematic preconceptions as examples of an oversized DoV. Mapping the different elements of knowledge – both the model and its domain of validity – allows teachers to pinpoint precisely the cognitive conflict that students need to confront in a conceptual change approach to teaching. We highlight the instructional implications related to these scientific learning difficulties and conclude by proposing particular teaching strategies based on this new framework, emphasising the domains of validity of particular scientific models.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"57 1","pages":"205 - 239"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2020-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2020.1824472","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42818758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：