掌握在教师学习环境中如何谈论科学计算实践的方法

IF 5.1 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Pub Date : 2024-05-02 DOI:10.1111/jcal.12976
Amy Voss Farris, Gözde McLaughlin
{"title":"掌握在教师学习环境中如何谈论科学计算实践的方法","authors":"Amy Voss Farris,&nbsp;Gözde McLaughlin","doi":"10.1111/jcal.12976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Science teachers' understanding of the roles of computing practices in science frame how they enact scientific computational practices in their teaching and how their students perceive the relationship between computational practices and scientific endeavours.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This critical, integrative review synthesizes teacher learning literature about the role of computational literacy and computing practices in K-12 science teaching.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We examined 54 peer-reviewed articles and analysed the ways the researchers and teacher participants describe the affordances of integrating computational thinking (CT) and other computational practices in science. We characterize how CT and computational practices are framed in relation to scientific learning goals. We identify six primary affordances for integrating computational practices with science that are conveyed to teachers and by teachers, as represented in these studies of teacher learning.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results and Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>These six perspectives include (1) learning computer science principles, (2) developing CT dispositions, (3) engagement and inclusion in science, (4) taking ownership of science, (5) supporting learning science content, and (6) participating in computational practice as a form of scientific epistemic practice. Our analysis indicates that computational thinking and computational practices are often integrated in science in order to teach something <i>about computing</i> (e.g., Perspective 1), rather than to support learners' scientific work. Only the 29 articles coded for the sixth perspective—that is, in service of epistemic aims in science—demonstrate commitment to students' uses of computational ideas and practices as epistemic tools to participate in the sensemaking work of science.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Takeaways</h3>\n \n <p>Comparison of Perspectives 5 and 6 illustrates the nuance between computational practices in science that reify something students have already “figured out,” rather than those that serve epistemic goals. Perspective 6 encapsulates the deep synergy among (1) the reflexive nature of computing with scientific ideas and (2) computing as a central practice in science and engineering. We contend that a more focused message of computational practices <i>in service</i> of scientific sensemaking goals is necessary if we expect teachers to enact CT and related computational practices in their classrooms.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","volume":"40 4","pages":"1922-1940"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcal.12976","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Getting a grip on how we talk about computational practices in science in settings of teacher learning\",\"authors\":\"Amy Voss Farris,&nbsp;Gözde McLaughlin\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jcal.12976\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Science teachers' understanding of the roles of computing practices in science frame how they enact scientific computational practices in their teaching and how their students perceive the relationship between computational practices and scientific endeavours.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>This critical, integrative review synthesizes teacher learning literature about the role of computational literacy and computing practices in K-12 science teaching.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We examined 54 peer-reviewed articles and analysed the ways the researchers and teacher participants describe the affordances of integrating computational thinking (CT) and other computational practices in science. We characterize how CT and computational practices are framed in relation to scientific learning goals. We identify six primary affordances for integrating computational practices with science that are conveyed to teachers and by teachers, as represented in these studies of teacher learning.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results and Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>These six perspectives include (1) learning computer science principles, (2) developing CT dispositions, (3) engagement and inclusion in science, (4) taking ownership of science, (5) supporting learning science content, and (6) participating in computational practice as a form of scientific epistemic practice. Our analysis indicates that computational thinking and computational practices are often integrated in science in order to teach something <i>about computing</i> (e.g., Perspective 1), rather than to support learners' scientific work. Only the 29 articles coded for the sixth perspective—that is, in service of epistemic aims in science—demonstrate commitment to students' uses of computational ideas and practices as epistemic tools to participate in the sensemaking work of science.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Takeaways</h3>\\n \\n <p>Comparison of Perspectives 5 and 6 illustrates the nuance between computational practices in science that reify something students have already “figured out,” rather than those that serve epistemic goals. Perspective 6 encapsulates the deep synergy among (1) the reflexive nature of computing with scientific ideas and (2) computing as a central practice in science and engineering. We contend that a more focused message of computational practices <i>in service</i> of scientific sensemaking goals is necessary if we expect teachers to enact CT and related computational practices in their classrooms.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning\",\"volume\":\"40 4\",\"pages\":\"1922-1940\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcal.12976\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.12976\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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 Computer Assisted Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.12976","RegionNum":2,"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

背景科学教师对计算实践在科学中的作用的理解,决定了他们如何在教学中实施科学计算实践,以及他们的学生如何看待计算实践与科学实践之间的关系。方法我们研究了54篇同行评议文章,分析了研究者和教师参与者描述将计算思维(CT)和其他计算实践整合到科学中的方式。我们描述了计算思维和计算实践如何与科学学习目标相关联。结果与结论这六个视角包括:(1)学习计算机科学原理;(2)培养计算思维能力;(3)参与和融入科学;(4)掌握科学;(5)支持学习科学内容;(6)将计算实践作为科学认识实践的一种形式。我们的分析表明,将计算思维和计算实践融入科学往往是为了传授有关计算的知识(如视角 1),而不是为了支持学习者的科学工作。只有为第六个视角(即服务于科学认识论目标)编码的 29 篇文章表明,学生致力于将计算思想和计算实践作为认识论工具来参与科学的感知工作。视角 6 囊括了以下两个方面的深刻协同作用:(1) 计算与科学思想的反思性;(2) 计算是科学与工程的核心实践。我们认为,如果我们希望教师在课堂上实施计算机辅助教学和相关的计算实践,那么就有必要更有针对性地传达计算实践服务于科学感知目标的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Getting a grip on how we talk about computational practices in science in settings of teacher learning

Background

Science teachers' understanding of the roles of computing practices in science frame how they enact scientific computational practices in their teaching and how their students perceive the relationship between computational practices and scientific endeavours.

Objectives

This critical, integrative review synthesizes teacher learning literature about the role of computational literacy and computing practices in K-12 science teaching.

Methods

We examined 54 peer-reviewed articles and analysed the ways the researchers and teacher participants describe the affordances of integrating computational thinking (CT) and other computational practices in science. We characterize how CT and computational practices are framed in relation to scientific learning goals. We identify six primary affordances for integrating computational practices with science that are conveyed to teachers and by teachers, as represented in these studies of teacher learning.

Results and Conclusions

These six perspectives include (1) learning computer science principles, (2) developing CT dispositions, (3) engagement and inclusion in science, (4) taking ownership of science, (5) supporting learning science content, and (6) participating in computational practice as a form of scientific epistemic practice. Our analysis indicates that computational thinking and computational practices are often integrated in science in order to teach something about computing (e.g., Perspective 1), rather than to support learners' scientific work. Only the 29 articles coded for the sixth perspective—that is, in service of epistemic aims in science—demonstrate commitment to students' uses of computational ideas and practices as epistemic tools to participate in the sensemaking work of science.

Takeaways

Comparison of Perspectives 5 and 6 illustrates the nuance between computational practices in science that reify something students have already “figured out,” rather than those that serve epistemic goals. Perspective 6 encapsulates the deep synergy among (1) the reflexive nature of computing with scientific ideas and (2) computing as a central practice in science and engineering. We contend that a more focused message of computational practices in service of scientific sensemaking goals is necessary if we expect teachers to enact CT and related computational practices in their classrooms.

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 Computer Assisted Learning
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
6.00%
发文量
116
期刊介绍: The Journal of Computer Assisted Learning is an international peer-reviewed journal which covers the whole range of uses of information and communication technology to support learning and knowledge exchange. It aims to provide a medium for communication among researchers as well as a channel linking researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. JCAL is also a rich source of material for master and PhD students in areas such as educational psychology, the learning sciences, instructional technology, instructional design, collaborative learning, intelligent learning systems, learning analytics, open, distance and networked learning, and educational evaluation and assessment. This is the case for formal (e.g., schools), non-formal (e.g., workplace learning) and informal learning (e.g., museums and libraries) situations and environments. Volumes often include one Special Issue which these provides readers with a broad and in-depth perspective on a specific topic. First published in 1985, JCAL continues to have the aim of making the outcomes of contemporary research and experience accessible. During this period there have been major technological advances offering new opportunities and approaches in the use of a wide range of technologies to support learning and knowledge transfer more generally. There is currently much emphasis on the use of network functionality and the challenges its appropriate uses pose to teachers/tutors working with students locally and at a distance. JCAL welcomes: -Empirical reports, single studies or programmatic series of studies on the use of computers and information technologies in learning and assessment -Critical and original meta-reviews of literature on the use of computers for learning -Empirical studies on the design and development of innovative technology-based systems for learning -Conceptual articles on issues relating to the Aims and Scope
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Incorporating online writing resources into self-regulated learning strategy-based instruction: An intervention study Using knowledge building and flipped learning to enhance students' learning performance in a hands-on STEM activity Duration versus accuracy—what matters for computerised adaptive testing in schools? Desktop-based virtual reality social platforms versus video conferencing platforms for online synchronous learning in higher education: An experimental study to evaluate students' learning gains and user experience
×
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