科学形成性评价共同设计中学生想法的资产和赤字论述

IF 3.6 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Research in Science Teaching Pub Date : 2024-04-23 DOI:10.1002/tea.21944
Caitlin G. M. Fine, Erin M. Furtak
{"title":"科学形成性评价共同设计中学生想法的资产和赤字论述","authors":"Caitlin G. M. Fine,&nbsp;Erin M. Furtak","doi":"10.1002/tea.21944","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Framework for K-12 Science Education set an ambitious goal of broadening participation in science learning for all students. Meeting this vision will involve supporting teachers in making meaningful connections with the cultural and linguistic resources their students bring to school; in essence, developing pedagogies that frame these resources as assets important to learning. In this manuscript, we present a qualitative case study of one community of high school science teachers who participated in a year-long professional learning focused on formative assessment co-design related to natural selection. Findings show that the process of formative assessment co-design surfaced both deficit- and asset-based statements about students' contributions. Teachers were more likely to share deficit-based statements as compared to facilitators, whose statements were more asset-based. This was particularly true with reference to students' prior knowledge and linguistic resources. At the same time, our analysis suggests that teachers were more likely to share more asset-based framings of learners when practicing for and reflecting on enactment of formative assessment tasks. These findings suggest that supportive co-design environments can encourage teachers to take more asset-oriented views of learners. We discuss the implications of these findings for professional learning and science classroom practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":48369,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Science Teaching","volume":"61 9","pages":"2133-2161"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Asset and deficit discourses of student ideas in science formative assessment co-design\",\"authors\":\"Caitlin G. M. Fine,&nbsp;Erin M. Furtak\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/tea.21944\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The Framework for K-12 Science Education set an ambitious goal of broadening participation in science learning for all students. Meeting this vision will involve supporting teachers in making meaningful connections with the cultural and linguistic resources their students bring to school; in essence, developing pedagogies that frame these resources as assets important to learning. In this manuscript, we present a qualitative case study of one community of high school science teachers who participated in a year-long professional learning focused on formative assessment co-design related to natural selection. Findings show that the process of formative assessment co-design surfaced both deficit- and asset-based statements about students' contributions. Teachers were more likely to share deficit-based statements as compared to facilitators, whose statements were more asset-based. This was particularly true with reference to students' prior knowledge and linguistic resources. At the same time, our analysis suggests that teachers were more likely to share more asset-based framings of learners when practicing for and reflecting on enactment of formative assessment tasks. These findings suggest that supportive co-design environments can encourage teachers to take more asset-oriented views of learners. We discuss the implications of these findings for professional learning and science classroom practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48369,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Research in Science Teaching\",\"volume\":\"61 9\",\"pages\":\"2133-2161\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Research in Science Teaching\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.21944\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Science Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.21944","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

K-12 科学教育框架设定了一个雄心勃勃的目标,即扩大所有学生对科学学习的参与。要实现这一愿景,就需要支持教师与学生带到学校的文化和语言资源建立有意义的联系;从本质上讲,就是开发教学法,将这些资源作为学习的重要资产。在本手稿中,我们介绍了一个高中科学教师群体的定性案例研究,他们参加了为期一年的专业学习,重点是与自然选择相关的形成性评估的共同设计。研究结果表明,在共同设计形成性评价的过程中,对学生的贡献既有基于不足的陈述,也有基于资产的陈述。与促进者相比,教师更倾向于分享以缺陷为基础的陈述,而促进者的陈述则更倾向于以资产为基础。这种情况在学生的已有知识和语言资源方面尤为明显。同时,我们的分析表明,在实践和反思形成性评价任务时,教师更倾向于对学习者进行更多基于资产的描述。这些研究结果表明,支持性的共同设计环境可以鼓励教师对学习者采取更加以资产为导向的观点。我们将讨论这些发现对专业学习和科学课堂实践的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Asset and deficit discourses of student ideas in science formative assessment co-design

The Framework for K-12 Science Education set an ambitious goal of broadening participation in science learning for all students. Meeting this vision will involve supporting teachers in making meaningful connections with the cultural and linguistic resources their students bring to school; in essence, developing pedagogies that frame these resources as assets important to learning. In this manuscript, we present a qualitative case study of one community of high school science teachers who participated in a year-long professional learning focused on formative assessment co-design related to natural selection. Findings show that the process of formative assessment co-design surfaced both deficit- and asset-based statements about students' contributions. Teachers were more likely to share deficit-based statements as compared to facilitators, whose statements were more asset-based. This was particularly true with reference to students' prior knowledge and linguistic resources. At the same time, our analysis suggests that teachers were more likely to share more asset-based framings of learners when practicing for and reflecting on enactment of formative assessment tasks. These findings suggest that supportive co-design environments can encourage teachers to take more asset-oriented views of learners. We discuss the implications of these findings for professional learning and science classroom practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Research in Science Teaching
Journal of Research in Science Teaching EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
19.60%
发文量
96
期刊介绍: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, the official journal of NARST: A Worldwide Organization for Improving Science Teaching and Learning Through Research, publishes reports for science education researchers and practitioners on issues of science teaching and learning and science education policy. Scholarly manuscripts within the domain of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching include, but are not limited to, investigations employing qualitative, ethnographic, historical, survey, philosophical, case study research, quantitative, experimental, quasi-experimental, data mining, and data analytics approaches; position papers; policy perspectives; critical reviews of the literature; and comments and criticism.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Artificial intelligence: Tool or teammate? “Powered by emotions”: Exploring emotion induction in out‐of‐school authentic science learning Issue Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1