Pub Date : 2017-04-27DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2017.1319632
Drew Bush, R. Sieber, G. Seiler, M. Chandler
Abstract This paper reviews university-level efforts to improve understanding of anthropogenic global climate change (AGCC) through curricula that enable student scientific inquiry. We examined 152 refereed publications and proceedings from academic conferences and selected 26 cases of inquiry learning that overcome specific challenges to AGCC teaching. This review identifies both the strengths and weaknesses of each of these case studies. It is the first to go beyond examining the impact of specific inquiry instructional approaches to offer a synthesis of cases. We find that inquiry teaching can succeed by concretising scientific processes, providing access to global data and evidence, imparting critical and higher order thinking about AGCC science/policy and contextualising learning with places and scientific facts. We recommend educational researchers and scientists collaborate to create and refine curricula that utilise geospatial technologies, climate models and communication technologies to bring students into contact with scientists, climate data and authentic AGCC research processes. Many available science education technologies and curricula also require further research to maximise trade-offs between implementation and training costs and their educational value.
{"title":"University-level teaching of Anthropogenic Global Climate Change (AGCC) via student inquiry","authors":"Drew Bush, R. Sieber, G. Seiler, M. Chandler","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2017.1319632","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2017.1319632","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper reviews university-level efforts to improve understanding of anthropogenic global climate change (AGCC) through curricula that enable student scientific inquiry. We examined 152 refereed publications and proceedings from academic conferences and selected 26 cases of inquiry learning that overcome specific challenges to AGCC teaching. This review identifies both the strengths and weaknesses of each of these case studies. It is the first to go beyond examining the impact of specific inquiry instructional approaches to offer a synthesis of cases. We find that inquiry teaching can succeed by concretising scientific processes, providing access to global data and evidence, imparting critical and higher order thinking about AGCC science/policy and contextualising learning with places and scientific facts. We recommend educational researchers and scientists collaborate to create and refine curricula that utilise geospatial technologies, climate models and communication technologies to bring students into contact with scientists, climate data and authentic AGCC research processes. Many available science education technologies and curricula also require further research to maximise trade-offs between implementation and training costs and their educational value.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"53 1","pages":"113 - 136"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2017-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2017.1319632","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49338975","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 : 2017-03-28DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2017.1305543
B. M. Jack, Huann‐shyang Lin
Abstract Generations of students are graduating from secondary school disinterested in post-secondary study of science or pursuing careers in science-related fields beyond formal education. We propose that destabilising such disinterest among future students requires science educators to begin listening to secondary school students regarding their views of how science learning is made interesting within the science classroom. Studies on students’ interest in response to instructional strategies applied in the classroom communicate the opinions (i.e. the ‘voice’) of students about the strategies they believe make their classroom learning interesting. To this end, this scoping study (1) collects empirical studies that present from various science and non-science academic domains students’ views about how to make classroom learning interesting; (2) identifies common instructional strategies across these domains that make learning interesting; and (3) forwards an instructional framework called TEDI ([T]ransdisciplinary Connections; Mediated [E]ngagement; Meaningful [D]iscovery; and Self-determined [I]nquiry), which may provide secondary school science teachers with a practical instructional approach for making learning science genuinely interesting among their students within the secondary school science classroom context.
{"title":"Making learning interesting and its application to the science classroom","authors":"B. M. Jack, Huann‐shyang Lin","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2017.1305543","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2017.1305543","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Generations of students are graduating from secondary school disinterested in post-secondary study of science or pursuing careers in science-related fields beyond formal education. We propose that destabilising such disinterest among future students requires science educators to begin listening to secondary school students regarding their views of how science learning is made interesting within the science classroom. Studies on students’ interest in response to instructional strategies applied in the classroom communicate the opinions (i.e. the ‘voice’) of students about the strategies they believe make their classroom learning interesting. To this end, this scoping study (1) collects empirical studies that present from various science and non-science academic domains students’ views about how to make classroom learning interesting; (2) identifies common instructional strategies across these domains that make learning interesting; and (3) forwards an instructional framework called TEDI ([T]ransdisciplinary Connections; Mediated [E]ngagement; Meaningful [D]iscovery; and Self-determined [I]nquiry), which may provide secondary school science teachers with a practical instructional approach for making learning science genuinely interesting among their students within the secondary school science classroom context.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"53 1","pages":"137 - 164"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2017-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2017.1305543","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41369729","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 : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2017.1248627
Prajakt Pande, S. Chandrasekharan
Abstract Multiple external representations (MERs) are central to the practice and learning of science, mathematics and engineering, as the phenomena and entities investigated and controlled in these domains are often not available for perception and action. MERs therefore play a twofold constitutive role in reasoning in these domains. Firstly, MERs stand in for the phenomena and entities that are imagined, and thus make possible scientific investigations. Secondly, related to the above, sensorimotor and imagination-based interactions with the MERs make possible focused cognitive operations involving these phenomena and entities, such as mental rotation and analogical transformations. These two constitutive roles suggest that acquiring expertise in science, mathematics and engineering requires developing the ability to transform and integrate the MERs in that field, in tandem with running operations in imagination on the phenomena and entities the MERs stand for. This core ability to integrate external and internal representations and operations on them – termed representational competence (RC) – is therefore critical to learning in science, mathematics and engineering. However, no general account of this core process is currently available. We argue that, given the above two constitutive roles played by MERs, a theoretical account of representational competence requires an explicit model of how the cognitive system interacts with external representations, and how imagination abilities develop through this process. At the applied level, this account is required to develop design guidelines for new media interventions for learning science and mathematics, particularly emerging ones that are based on embodied interactions. As a first step to developing such a theoretical account, we review the literature on learning with MERs, as well as acquiring RC, in chemistry, biology, physics, mathematics and engineering, from two perspectives. First, we focus on the important theoretical accounts and related empirical studies, and examine what is common about them. Second, we summarise the major trends in each discipline, and then bring together these trends. The results show that most models and empirical studies of RC are framed within the classical information processing approach, and do not take a constitutive view of external representations. To develop an account compatible with the constitutive view of external representations, we outline an interaction-based theoretical account of RC, extending recent advances in distributed and embodied cognition.
{"title":"Representational competence: towards a distributed and embodied cognition account","authors":"Prajakt Pande, S. Chandrasekharan","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2017.1248627","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2017.1248627","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Multiple external representations (MERs) are central to the practice and learning of science, mathematics and engineering, as the phenomena and entities investigated and controlled in these domains are often not available for perception and action. MERs therefore play a twofold constitutive role in reasoning in these domains. Firstly, MERs stand in for the phenomena and entities that are imagined, and thus make possible scientific investigations. Secondly, related to the above, sensorimotor and imagination-based interactions with the MERs make possible focused cognitive operations involving these phenomena and entities, such as mental rotation and analogical transformations. These two constitutive roles suggest that acquiring expertise in science, mathematics and engineering requires developing the ability to transform and integrate the MERs in that field, in tandem with running operations in imagination on the phenomena and entities the MERs stand for. This core ability to integrate external and internal representations and operations on them – termed representational competence (RC) – is therefore critical to learning in science, mathematics and engineering. However, no general account of this core process is currently available. We argue that, given the above two constitutive roles played by MERs, a theoretical account of representational competence requires an explicit model of how the cognitive system interacts with external representations, and how imagination abilities develop through this process. At the applied level, this account is required to develop design guidelines for new media interventions for learning science and mathematics, particularly emerging ones that are based on embodied interactions. As a first step to developing such a theoretical account, we review the literature on learning with MERs, as well as acquiring RC, in chemistry, biology, physics, mathematics and engineering, from two perspectives. First, we focus on the important theoretical accounts and related empirical studies, and examine what is common about them. Second, we summarise the major trends in each discipline, and then bring together these trends. The results show that most models and empirical studies of RC are framed within the classical information processing approach, and do not take a constitutive view of external representations. To develop an account compatible with the constitutive view of external representations, we outline an interaction-based theoretical account of RC, extending recent advances in distributed and embodied cognition.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"53 1","pages":"1 - 43"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2017.1248627","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44118252","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 : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2016.1262046
Richard Brock, K. Taber
Abstract This paper examines the role of the microgenetic method in science education. The microgenetic method is a technique for exploring the progression of learning in detail through repeated, high-frequency observations of a learner’s ‘performance’ in some activity. Existing microgenetic studies in science education are analysed. This leads to an examination of five significant methodological issues in microgenetic research. Firstly, qualitative and/or quantitative approaches to data collection and analysis within the microgenetic approach are considered and a case is made for the appropriateness of qualitative microgenetic research. Secondly, it is argued that researchers may define static intervals, periods within which (for methodological purposes) change is assumed not to occur, when reporting microgenetic studies. Thirdly, researchers should consider providing justifications for their choice of sampling rate with reference to the rate of change of the phenomenon they are studying. Fourthly, the difficulty of distinguishing conceptual change from the existence of multiple understandings is highlighted. Finally, the nature of sequences of repeated measures in microgenetic studies is considered. It is argued that different methodological approaches are suitable for microgenetic studies of different phenomena and a list of guidelines for the use of the microgenetic method in small-scale, qualitatively analysed studies in science education is proposed.
{"title":"The application of the microgenetic method to studies of learning in science education: characteristics of published studies, methodological issues and recommendations for future research","authors":"Richard Brock, K. Taber","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2016.1262046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1262046","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper examines the role of the microgenetic method in science education. The microgenetic method is a technique for exploring the progression of learning in detail through repeated, high-frequency observations of a learner’s ‘performance’ in some activity. Existing microgenetic studies in science education are analysed. This leads to an examination of five significant methodological issues in microgenetic research. Firstly, qualitative and/or quantitative approaches to data collection and analysis within the microgenetic approach are considered and a case is made for the appropriateness of qualitative microgenetic research. Secondly, it is argued that researchers may define static intervals, periods within which (for methodological purposes) change is assumed not to occur, when reporting microgenetic studies. Thirdly, researchers should consider providing justifications for their choice of sampling rate with reference to the rate of change of the phenomenon they are studying. Fourthly, the difficulty of distinguishing conceptual change from the existence of multiple understandings is highlighted. Finally, the nature of sequences of repeated measures in microgenetic studies is considered. It is argued that different methodological approaches are suitable for microgenetic studies of different phenomena and a list of guidelines for the use of the microgenetic method in small-scale, qualitatively analysed studies in science education is proposed.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"53 1","pages":"45 - 73"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2016.1262046","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47177380","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 : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2016.1258108
M. R. Matthews
{"title":"Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education","authors":"M. R. Matthews","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2016.1258108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1258108","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"53 1","pages":"105 - 107"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2016.1258108","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43076249","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 : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2016.1275380
Bronwyn Bevan
Abstract Making is a rapidly emerging form of educational practice that involves the design, construction, testing, and revision of a wide variety of objects, using high and low technologies, and integrating a range of disciplines including art, science, engineering, and mathematics. It has garnered widespread interest and support in both policy and education circles because of the ways it has been shown to link science learning to creativity and investigation. Making has taken root in out-of-school settings, such as museums, science festivals, and afterschool and library programmes; and there is now growing interest from primary and secondary educators in how it might be incorporated into the classroom. Making expands on traditions associated with Technology Education and Design-Based Learning, but differs in ways that can potentially broaden participation in science and STEM learning to include learners from communities historically underrepresented in STEM fields. STEM-Rich Making is centrally organised around design and engineering practices, typically integrating digital tools and computational practices, and positions scientific and mathematical concepts and phenomena as the materials for design. This paper takes a critical view of the claims about Making as a productive form of science teaching and learning, and reviews the current research literature’s substantiation of the ways in which Making supports students’ agency, promotes active participation in science and engineering practices, and leverages learners’ cultural resources.
{"title":"The promise and the promises of Making in science education","authors":"Bronwyn Bevan","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2016.1275380","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1275380","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Making is a rapidly emerging form of educational practice that involves the design, construction, testing, and revision of a wide variety of objects, using high and low technologies, and integrating a range of disciplines including art, science, engineering, and mathematics. It has garnered widespread interest and support in both policy and education circles because of the ways it has been shown to link science learning to creativity and investigation. Making has taken root in out-of-school settings, such as museums, science festivals, and afterschool and library programmes; and there is now growing interest from primary and secondary educators in how it might be incorporated into the classroom. Making expands on traditions associated with Technology Education and Design-Based Learning, but differs in ways that can potentially broaden participation in science and STEM learning to include learners from communities historically underrepresented in STEM fields. STEM-Rich Making is centrally organised around design and engineering practices, typically integrating digital tools and computational practices, and positions scientific and mathematical concepts and phenomena as the materials for design. This paper takes a critical view of the claims about Making as a productive form of science teaching and learning, and reviews the current research literature’s substantiation of the ways in which Making supports students’ agency, promotes active participation in science and engineering practices, and leverages learners’ cultural resources.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"53 1","pages":"103 - 75"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2016.1275380","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44500009","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 : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2015.1034482
M. Reiss
{"title":"Understanding the culture of Creationism","authors":"M. Reiss","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2015.1034482","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2015.1034482","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"52 1","pages":"233 - 236"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2015.1034482","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59315142","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 : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2016.1206351
Silke Rönnebeck, S. Bernholt, Mathias Ropohl
Abstract Despite the importance of scientific inquiry in science education, researchers and educators disagree considerably regarding what features define this instructional approach. While a large body of literature addresses theoretical considerations, numerous empirical studies investigate scientific inquiry on quite different levels of detail and also on different theoretical grounds. Here, only little systematic research has analysed the different conceptualisations and usages of the overarching construct of scientific inquiry in detail. To close this gap, a review of the research literature on scientific inquiry was conducted based on a widespread approach to defining scientific inquiry as activities that students engage in. The main goal is to provide a systematic overview about the range and spectrum of definitions and operationalisations used with regard to single activities of the inquiry process in empirical studies. The findings from the review first and foremost illustrate the variability in the ways these activities have been operationalised and implemented. For each activity, studies differ significantly not only with respect to the focus, explicitness and comprehensiveness of their operationalisations but also with regard to the consistency of their implementation in the form of instructional or interventional components in the study and/or in the focus of the assessment of student performance. This has significant implications regarding the validity and comparability of results obtained in different studies, e.g. in the context of discussions concerning the effectiveness of inquiry-based instruction. In addition, the interrelation between scientific inquiry, scientific knowledge and the nature of science seems to be underexplored. The conclusions make the case for further theoretical work as well as empirical research.
{"title":"Searching for a common ground – A literature review of empirical research on scientific inquiry activities","authors":"Silke Rönnebeck, S. Bernholt, Mathias Ropohl","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2016.1206351","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1206351","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Despite the importance of scientific inquiry in science education, researchers and educators disagree considerably regarding what features define this instructional approach. While a large body of literature addresses theoretical considerations, numerous empirical studies investigate scientific inquiry on quite different levels of detail and also on different theoretical grounds. Here, only little systematic research has analysed the different conceptualisations and usages of the overarching construct of scientific inquiry in detail. To close this gap, a review of the research literature on scientific inquiry was conducted based on a widespread approach to defining scientific inquiry as activities that students engage in. The main goal is to provide a systematic overview about the range and spectrum of definitions and operationalisations used with regard to single activities of the inquiry process in empirical studies. The findings from the review first and foremost illustrate the variability in the ways these activities have been operationalised and implemented. For each activity, studies differ significantly not only with respect to the focus, explicitness and comprehensiveness of their operationalisations but also with regard to the consistency of their implementation in the form of instructional or interventional components in the study and/or in the focus of the assessment of student performance. This has significant implications regarding the validity and comparability of results obtained in different studies, e.g. in the context of discussions concerning the effectiveness of inquiry-based instruction. In addition, the interrelation between scientific inquiry, scientific knowledge and the nature of science seems to be underexplored. The conclusions make the case for further theoretical work as well as empirical research.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"52 1","pages":"161 - 197"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2016.1206351","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59315661","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 : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2015.1108482
G. Aikenhead
Published as Volume 10 in the series ‘Cultural Studies of Science Education,’ Mariana Hewson’s book not only fulfils the series’ mandate to ‘employ social and cultural perspectives as foundations f...
{"title":"Removing epistemic blinkers and biases: a much needed conversation","authors":"G. Aikenhead","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2015.1108482","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2015.1108482","url":null,"abstract":"Published as Volume 10 in the series ‘Cultural Studies of Science Education,’ Mariana Hewson’s book not only fulfils the series’ mandate to ‘employ social and cultural perspectives as foundations f...","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"52 1","pages":"237 - 245"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2015.1108482","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59315255","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：