DOCSLIB.ORG

Exploring Knowledge and Practices of Metacognition in Beginning

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Exploring Knowledge and Practices of Metacognition in Beginning University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Theses, Student Research, and Creative Activity: Department of Teaching, Learning and Teacher Department of Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education Education Fall 10-10-2017 Bonding Ideas about Inquiry: Exploring Knowledge and Practices of Metacognition in Beginning Secondary Science Teachers Ana Margarita Rivero Arias University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/teachlearnstudent Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons, Science and Mathematics Education Commons, and the Secondary Education Commons Rivero Arias, Ana Margarita, "Bonding Ideas about Inquiry: Exploring Knowledge and Practices of Metacognition in Beginning Secondary Science Teachers" (2017). Theses, Student Research, and Creative Activity: Department of Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education. 82. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/teachlearnstudent/82 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Student Research, and Creative Activity: Department of Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. BONDING IDEAS ABOUT INQUIRY: EXPLORING KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICES OF METACOGNITION IN BEGINNING SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS by Ana Margarita Rivero Arias A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Major: Educational Studies (Teaching, Curriculum, and Learning) Under the Supervision of Professor Elizabeth Lewis Lincoln, Nebraska September, 2017 ii BONDING IDEAS ABOUT INQUIRY: EXPLORING KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICES OF METACOGNITION IN BEGINNING SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS Ana Margarita Rivero Arias, Ph.D. University of Nebraska, 2017 Advisor: Elizabeth Lewis Metacognition, identified generally as “thinking about thinking,” plays a fundamental role in science education. It enhances the understanding of science as a way to generate new knowledge using scientific concepts and practices. Moreover, metacognition supports the development of students’ life-long problem solving, collaboration, and critical thinking skills. When teachers use metacognition with intention, it can promote students’ agency and responsibility for their own learning. However, despite all of its benefits, metacognition is rarely seen in secondary science classrooms. Thus, it is important to understand what beginning teachers know and how they use metacognition during their first years in order to find ways to prepare and support them in incorporating metacognitive practices into their science teaching. The purpose of this multimethod study was to describe the metacognitive knowledge and experiences of beginning science teachers. For the quantitative research strand, I surveyed 36 secondary science teachers about their awareness of metacognition and used classroom observations coded from a larger research study to identify how often teachers were using metacognition to teach science. For the qualitative strand, I interviewed 15 participants about their knowledge and experiences of metacognition iii (including reflective practices) and spent two weeks observing two of the teachers who described exemplary metacognitive teaching practices. I found that participants had a solid awareness of metacognition, but considered the term complicated to enact, difficult for students, and less important to focus on during their first years of teaching than other elements such as content. Additionally, teaching experience seemed to have an effect on teachers’ knowledge and experiences of metacognition. However, participants who were using metacognitive practices had recognized their importance since the beginning of their teaching. Reflective practices can help improve teaching, but what seems more effective is for teachers to have an experience using metacognition embedded in science content. The results of this study include a description of metacognitive teaching practices that could be helpful for secondary science teachers. The study also provides recommendations for future research, especially for teacher education programs, to promote a better understanding of metacognition while preparing secondary science teachers. iv This dissertation is dedicated to: God, for giving me this opportunity and the strength to accomplish it. My parents, Eric and Mari Carmen Rivero, for their example, support, and love. My sisters, Araceli, Pamy, Maruch, and Mech, for always encouraging me. To all my family and friends, and especially those who I met in Lincoln during my graduate studies. I have you all in my heart. To those heroic science teachers who do their best every day in their classrooms to promote students’ scientific literacy. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To my advisor, Dr. Beth Lewis, for the opportunity to learn from her. For her knowledge, guidance, and example as a committed science education professional, researcher, and caring person. Thank you, Dr. Lewis! To my committee: to Dr. Ted Hamann, for all his knowledge and wisdom, but especially because he convinced me to start my Ph.D. program at UNL; to Dr. Stains, for all her feedback on my work and support in all our research projects; to Dr. Hostetler, for those interesting class discussions about Dewey and the scientific revolutions that ended in the present research study. To my professors, especially to Dr. Loukia Sarroub for helping me discover the perspective of an educational researcher. To the science teachers who generously agreed to participate in this research study, with my admiration, affection, and respect. To my research group, Aaron Musson, Jia Lu, Lyrica Lucas, and Amy Tankersley, for sharing this wonderful research adventure with me; and to all the people who contributed somehow to this project. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction ……………………………………………………….. 1 Metacognition and Science Teaching and Learning ……………….. 1 The Role of Metacognition in Learning Science …………………... 4 Metacognition and the Gap Between Theory and Practice ………… 7 Purpose of the Study ……………………………………………….. 10 Chapter 2: Literature Review …………………………………………………. 14 Metacognition ………………………………………………………. 15 Definition of Metacognition ……………………………...…… 17 Model of Metacognition ………………...…………………….. 19 Metacognition and other Constructs …………………………... 24 Metacognition as a Skill ……………………………………….. 28 Metacognition and Epistemology of Science …………...………….. 30 Metacognition and Collaboration …………………...……………… 34 Metacognitive Teaching Practices ………………………………….. 37 Metacognition and Formative Assessment …………………………. 42 Metacognition and Reflective Practices …………………………….. 48 Reflection and Teaching ……………………………………… 49 Metacognition and Science Education Research …………………… 61 Conclusion ……………………………………………...…………... 66 Chapter 3: Study Methodology ……………………………………………….. 68 Theoretical Perspective ……………………………………………... 68 Research Paradigm ………………………………………………….. 72 vii Position of the Researcher…………………………………………… 73 Research Design …………………………………………………….. 74 Participants ………………………………………………………….. 76 Data Collection ……………………………………...……………… 78 Analytic Methods …………………………………………………… 87 Chapter 4: Results …………………………………………………………….. 97 Research Question #1: What is Beginning Secondary Science Teachers’ Understanding of Metacognition? ……………………….. 97 Research Question #2: What are the Common Instructional Practices of Metacognition (Metacognitive Teaching) Used by Beginning Science Teachers? ………………………..……………….………... 121 Research Question #3: What are Beginning Science Teachers’ Reflective Practices as Experiences of Metacognition? ……...…….. 182 Research Question #4: What Knowledge and Experience of Metacognition Affect Teachers’ Instructional Practices of Metacognition (or Metacognitive Teaching)? ………………...……. 229 Chapter 5: Discussion of Study Findings ……………………...……………... 255 Discussion …………………………………………………………... 255 Research Question #1: What is Beginning Secondary Science Teachers’ Understanding of Metacognition? ………………………. 255 Research Question #2: What are the Common Instructional Practices of Metacognition (Metacognitive Teaching) in Beginning Science Teachers? …….……………………………..…………….. 272 viii Research Question #3: What are Beginning Science Teachers’ Reflective Practices as Experiences of Metacognition? ……………. 278 Research Question #4: What Knowledge and Experiences of Metacognition Affect Teachers’ Instructional Practices of Metacognition (or Metacognitive Teaching)? ………………..……. 286 Conclusions ……………..………………………………………….. 292 Chapter 6: Conclusions and Implications of Study …………………..……….. 294 Implications and Relevance of Study ………………...…………….. 294 Limitations of the Study …………………………………………….. 296 Recommendations for Future Research …………………………….. 300 Recommendations for Teacher Education Programs ……………….. 301 Conclusions …………………………………………………………. 304 References …………………………………………………………………….. 307 Appendix A: NGSS Scientific and Engineering Practices ……………………. 325 Appendix B: Conceptual Differences Between Metacognition, Self- regulation, and Self-regulated Learning ………………………………………. 326 Appendix C: IRB Approval Letter ……………………………………………. 327 Appendix D: Consent Forms ………………………………………………….. 328 Appendix E: Participants’ Demographic Information in the Qualitative Strand of the Study ……………………….…………………………………………..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • JOHN NOVEMBRE, Phd
    JOHN NOVEMBRE, PhD The University of Chicago Department of Human Genetics 920 E 58th Steet CLSC 421 Chicago, IL 60637 Email: [email protected] Webpage: http://jnpopgen.org/ Curriculum Vitae Formatted to Guidelines for UChicago Biological Sciences Division ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS 2017- Professor, University of Chicago, Department of Human Genetics, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (secondary appointment) 2013-2017 Associate Professor, University of Chicago, Department of Human Genetics, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (secondary appointment) 2012-2013 Associate Professor, University of California–Los Angeles, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Interdepartmental Program in Bioinformatics 2008-2012 Assistant Professor, University of California–Los Angeles, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Interdepartmental Program in Bioinformatics Ph.D.-Granting Committee, Program, Institute, and Center Appointments 2013- Committee on Evolutionary Biology, University of Chicago 2013- Committee on Genetics, Genomics, and Systems Biology, University of Chicago 2008-2013 Indepartmental Program in Bioinformatics, UCLA 2012-2009 Center for Society and Genetics, UCLA ACADEMIC TRAINING 2006-2008 Postdoctoral training, Department of Human Genetics University of Chicago, Chicago, IL. Advisor: Matthew Stephens 2006 PhD, Integrative Biology, designated emphasis in Computational Biology/Genomics University of California-Berkeley, Berkeley, CA. Advisor: Montgomery Slatkin Dissertation title: Statistical methods
    [Show full text]
  • SKA-Athena Synergy White Paper
    SKA-Athena Synergy White Paper SKA-Athena Synergy Team July 2018. Edited by: Francisco J. Carrera and Silvia Martínez-Núñez on behalf of the Athena Community Office. Revisions provided by: Judith Croston, Andrew C. Fabian, Robert Laing, Didier Barret, Robert Braun, Kirpal Nandra Authorship Authors Rossella Cassano (INAF-Istituto di Radioastronomia, Italy). • Rob Fender (University of Oxford, United Kingdom). • Chiara Ferrari (Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, France). • Andrea Merloni (Max-Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics, Germany). • Contributors Takuya Akahori (Kagoshima University, Japan). • Hiroki Akamatsu (SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, The Netherlands). • Yago Ascasibar (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain). • David Ballantyne (Georgia Institute of Technology, United States). • Gianfranco Brunetti (INAF-Istituto di Radioastronomia, Italy) and Maxim Markevitch (NASA-Goddard • Space Flight Center, United States). Judith Croston (The Open University, United Kingdom). • Imma Donnarumma (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana, Italy) and E. M. Rossi (Leiden Observatory, The • Netherlands). Robert Ferdman (University of East Anglia, United Kingdom) on behalf of the SKA Pulsar Science • Working Group. Luigina Feretti (INAF-Istituto di Radioastronomia, Italy) and Federica Govoni (INAF Osservatorio • Astronomico,Italy). Jan Forbrich (University of Hertfordshire, United Kingdom). • Giancarlo Ghirlanda (INAF-Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera and University Milano Bicocca, Italy). • Adriano Ingallinera (INAF-Osservatorio Astrofisico di Catania, Italy). • Andrei Mesinger (Scuola Normale Superiore, Italy). • Vanessa Moss and Elaine Sadler (Sydney Institute for Astronomy/CAASTRO and University of Sydney, • Australia). Fabrizio Nicastro (Osservatorio Astronomico di Roma,Italy), Edvige Corbelli (INAF-Osservatorio As- • trofisico di Arcetri, Italy) and Luigi Piro (INAF, Istituto di Astrofisica e Planetologia Spaziali, Italy). Paolo Padovani (European Southern Observatory, Germany). • Francesca Panessa (INAF/Istituto di Astrofisica e Planetologia Spaziali, Italy).
    [Show full text]
  • See Tony's Slides Here
    Climate change the science & the lies Tony Eggleton Outline Some basic climate stuff – what the science says About trust and lies How to misinform 1. Attack the person 2. “It stands to reason” 3. Cherry pick or brush aside 4. Use lots of wrong numbers 5. Use the wrong data 6. Be important, be wrong, and say it anyway The pillars of climate science causes causes Global warming. • What is the evidence? • Land-based thermometers Boulia, Qld Of course one Met station is not enough, but 30,000 is C) 14.8 ° 14.6 14.4 14.2 14.0 13.8 13.6 Temperature rise ( rise Temperature 13.4 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 NASA Goddard Space Institute Don’t like scientists’ measurements? • What about oenologists? Date of maturity for grapes is getting earlier every year Mar 20 Mar 1 1930 2010 The Greenhouse Warm body radiates heat away and gets cold Add a blanket, reduce heat loss Thicker blanket, more heat trapped, now a hot dog We are warmed by the sun and radiate our warmth out into space sun earth . There is a lot of cold space out there to accept our radiated heat OK, so you can see - 23° C 14° C We have an atmosphere blanket, the moon does not Sun’s heat comes in 29% is reflected back into space That is known as Earth’s albedo. Compare Venus 90%, the moon 7%. Earth warms air, air radiates heat away 1.8 ppm 0.3 ppm Greenhouse gases and their part in keeping us warm 400 ppm = 0.04% 4%± Why has the Earth warmed over the past two centuries? Because we have added a lot of CO2 Are you sure? Perhaps it is just a coincidence! And what does a bit of warming do? Melts ice, mainly in the Arctic.
    [Show full text]
  • Augmented Reality in Teaching Descriptive Geometry, Engineering and Computer Graphics – Systematic Review and Results of the Russian Teachers’ Experience
    EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2019, 15(12), em1816 ISSN:1305-8223 (online) OPEN ACCESS Research Paper https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/113503 Augmented Reality in Teaching Descriptive Geometry, Engineering and Computer Graphics – Systematic Review and Results of the Russian Teachers’ Experience Marianna V. Voronina 1, Zlata O. Tretyakova 1*, Ekaterina G. Krivonozhkina 2, Stanislav I. Buslaev 3, 3 Grigory G. Sidorenko 1 Saint-Petersburg Mining University, Saint Petersburg, RUSSIA 2 Kazan (Volga region) Federal University, Kazan, RUSSIA 3 Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow, RUSSIA Received 10 June 2019 ▪ Revised 25 September 2019 ▪ Accepted 14 October 2019 ABSTRACT The relevance and feasibility of this study are determined by the absence of serious, scientific research, as well as teaching materials, when it comes to the use of Augmented Reality (AR) in teaching students and future teachers Descriptive Geometry, Engineering and Computer Graphics (DGECG). The purpose of the study is to examine the current state of knowledge and practice of existing courses, which use the AR concept; to conduct a pedagogical experiment by teaching students how to create an information model of a building structure using the AR concept; to study the impact of the AR technology on students, lecturers, on the quality of students’ design works and project presentation. The research methods used were a set of various, complementing each other methods, which can be divided into two groups: 1) theoretical: analysis of the teachers’ and psychologists’ works on the point of the research, analysis of methodological and educational literature; empirical: observation, statement, pedagogical experiment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University
    The Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University NSF #0937591 September 1, 2012 – August 31, 2013 PI: David H. Guston, Arizona State University Co-PIs: Elizabeth Corley, Arizona State University Deirdre Meldrum, Arizona State University Clark Miller, Arizona State University Dietram Scheufele, University of Wisconsin, Madison Jan Youtie, Georgia Institute of Technology Annual Report for the Period September 1, 2012 to August 31, 2013 This report includes work conducted at three collaborating universities of NSEC/CNS-ASU: Arizona State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, and the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Annual Report for Award #0937591 September 1, 2012 – August 31, 2013 2. Table of Contents Project Summary 3 List of Center Participants, Advisory Boards, and Participating Institutions 4 Quantifiable Outputs – Table 1 44 Mission, Significant Advances, and Broader Impacts 45 Highlights 61 Strategic Research Plan 70 Research Program, Accomplishments, and Plans 73 a. RTTA 1 73 b. RTTA 2 78 c. RTTA 3 83 d. RTTA 4 92 e. TRC 1 98 f. TRC 2 101 Center Diversity – Progress and Plans 109 Education 113 Outreach and Knowledge Transfer 128 Shared and Other Experimental Facilities 138 Personnel 141 Publications and Patents 146 Biographical Information 263 Honors and Awards 272 Fiscal Sections 274 Cost-Sharing Section 295 Leverage 307 Current and Pending Support 317 1 Annual Report for Award #0937591 September 1, 2012 – August 31, 2013 (2. Table of Contents continued) Tables Table 1 44 Table 2 108 Table 3A 127 Table 3B 127 Table 4A 144 Table 4B 145 Table 5 310 Table 6 311 2 Annual Report for Award #0937591 September 1, 2012 – August 31, 2013 3.
    [Show full text]
  • A Veteran Science Teacher's Transitions to NGSS Corey Edward
    Electronic Journal of Science Education Vol. 23, No. 4 A Veteran Science Teacher’s Transitions to NGSS Corey Edward Nagle University of West Florida, USA John L. Pecore University of West Florida, USA Abstract Curricular reforms in science education represent an opportunity for changes in instructional approaches with the intent of making learning and teaching more meaningful and effective. While beginning teachers may receive instruction on pedagogy aligned with adopted reforms, veteran teachers need support and development to implement instruction aligned with reforms. This qualitative case study focused on the transitions of a veteran, Grade 6 science teacher to implement instruction consistent with three-dimensional instruction outlined in the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS Lead States, 2013). Themes that emerged through analyses of data included the desire and methods for developing pedagogical knowledge, collaborative supports for changing pedagogy, and resulting changes in pedagogy. Suggestions for further study include exploration of types of professional development that support changing pedagogy and a long-term study of teacher efficacy in three-dimensional instructional approaches outlined in NGSS (NGSS Lead States, 2013). Key words: Changing pedagogy, Curricular reforms, Instruction, Middle School, Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), Science and Engineering Practices, Veteran Science Teachers Please address all correspondence to: Corey E. Nagle, Ed. D., [email protected] Introduction Implicit in the development and adoption of standards is the expectation of uniform outcomes throughout a district, region, state, or country as measured by standardized assessments (Deboer, 2002; Eisner, 2005; Qureshi et al., 2016). While a focus on standardization frames opportunities for accountability measures, the consequence is a narrowing of curricula to focus instruction and learning on what is tested (Eisner, 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • To What Extent Are Higher-Order Thinking Questions Posed During the Mission to Mars Program?
    To what extent are higher-order thinking questions posed during the Mission to Mars program? Sonia Hankova Melbourne Graduate School of Education, Melbourne University In affiliation with the Victorian Space Science Education Centre (VSSEC) 2nd November 2016 Abstract This paper explores the role of questioning as a key pedagogic strategy to engaging learners in higher orders thinking and presents the results from observational research undertaken at the Victorian Space Science Education Centre. The research focused on investigating questioning strategies used to facilitate the inquiry-based Mission to Mars program that aims to engage and immerse students in a technology rich and sensory stimulating environment based on real-life scenarios and hands-on approach to science learning within the context of space. The current paper highlights the importance of questioning in science education and presents VSSEC with some valuable feedback and recommendations for improvement. Keywords: questioning strategies, higher orders thinking, science education, VSSEC, inquiry-based learning Introduction There is a general consensus that science education is fundamental to developing citizens who can become ‘effective explorers of the world’ (Gregson, 2012, p. 7) . Connecting students with science, regardless of whether they wanted to pursue it as a career or not, is central to education in order to cultivate investigative, creative, path- finding and opportunity-seizing risk takers who are unafraid to undertake the journey of curiosity and wonder about
    [Show full text]
  • Engaging Student Empathy in STEM
    ELECTRONIC JOURNAL FOR RESEARCH IN SCIENCE & MATHEMATICS EDUCATION VOL. 24, NO. 2, 22-55 Problem-Based Design Thinking Tasks: Engaging Student Empathy in STEM Regina P. McCurdy University of Central Florida Megan Nickels University of Central Florida Sarah B. Bush University of Central Florida ABSTRACT This study examines the interaction between students’ expressions of empathy and the use of STEM integration in the science classroom. Third space theory provides the context from which this classroom ethnographic qualitative study took place, as it provided an environment in which discourse among students’ sociocultural perspectives, life experiences, and academic backgrounds could develop and interact. Nineteen seventh-grade students from a Title 1 school, a school that receives federal aid to better support students coming from low-income families, in the Southeast United States participated in this study. Participants generated their own real-world problem-based design-thinking (PBDT) tasks to address and solve. Students exhibited significant characteristics of empathy and integration of various STEM content and practices evidenced by in-class discussions, field-notes observations, student artifacts, and individual student interviews as part of the STEM Third Space Genius Hour sessions. The PBDT Framework, inspired by the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS) learning cycle and design thinking (DT), provides the conceptual lens through which to view the connectedness among students’ PBDT tasks, STEM, and empathy. Keywords: STEM, authentic learning, problem-based learning, design thinking, middle grades, empathy Introduction As early as the 19th century, scientists, educators, and educational philosophers have called attention to the need to integrate socially relevant issues using problem-based learning methods in the science classroom as a way to connect and “orient a student’s efforts toward the solution of the problems that were real to the student” (DeBoer, 1991, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Louis Roy, OP
    Louis Roy, OP Publications (as of April 2020) Books Doctoral dissertation: ‘The Form of the Personal’: A Study of the Philosophy of John Macmurray with Particular Reference to his Critique of Religious ‘Idealism’. University of Cambridge, 1984, 237 pages. Available at ProQuest Dissertation, or at Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms International, order no. DA8501107. Bernard J. F. Lonergan. Pour une méthode en théologie, traduit par Louis Roy, avec plusieurs collaborateurs et réviseurs, et comprenant un glossaire composé par Louis Roy. Montréal, Fides, et Paris, Éditions du Cerf, 1978, 468 pages. Bernard J. F. Lonergan. Les voies d’une théologie méthodique, dir. Pierrot Lambert et Louis Roy, avec une introduction par Louis Roy. Montréal, Bellarmin, et Paris, Desclée, 1982, 242 pages. La foi en quête de cohérence. Montréal, Bellarmin, 1988, 162 pages. Se réaliser et suivre Jésus : est-ce possible? Montréal, Fides, 1989, 126 pages. Le sentiment de transcendance, expérience de Dieu ? Paris, Éditions du Cerf, 2000, 136 pages. Transcendent Experiences: Phenomenology and Critique. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001, xiv + 219 pages. Self-Actualization and the Radical Gospel. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2002, viii + 72 pages. [= English version, revised and expanded, of Se réaliser et suivre Jésus: est-ce possible ?] Mystical Consciousness: Western Perspectives and Dialogue with Japanese Thinkers. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2003, xxi + 229 pages. Coherent Christianity. Ottawa: Novalis, 2005, 142 pages [= English translation of La foi en quête de cohérence]. Revised edition, titled Coherent Christianity: Toward an Articulate Faith. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2018, 161 pages. La foi en dialogue. Ottawa, Novalis, 2006, 213 pages [= 2e édition, mise à jour et augmentée, de La foi en quête de cohérence].
    [Show full text]
  • Designing Critique for Knowledge Integration
    Designing Critique for Knowledge Integration by Mie Elissa Sato A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Science and Mathematics Education in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Marcia F. Linn, Chair Joseph C. Campione Robert C. Rhew Michael J. Clancy Summer 2015 Designing Critique for Knowledge Integration © 2015 by Mie Elissa Sato Abstract Designing Critique for Knowledge Integration by Mie Elissa Sato Doctor of Philosophy in Science and Mathematics Education University of California, Berkeley Professor Marcia C. Linn, Chair Generating explanations is central to science and has the potential to have a powerful impact on students’ conceptual understanding in science instruction. However, improving conceptual understanding by generating explanations is a fraught affair: students may struggle with the sense of false clarity that may arise from generating explanations, fail to detect gaps in their understanding, and dismiss salient information that contradict their beliefs. Critiquing explanations has the potential to counteract these pitfalls by exposing students to alternative ideas to contrast with their own. This dissertation seeks to clarify how to design critique in technology-enhanced science instruction to support students in revising their explanations about scientific phenomena, and in doing so, refining their conceptual understanding. Using the Knowledge Integration framework, I revised two technology-enhanced curriculum units, Plate Tectonics and Global Climate Change, in a design partnership between teachers, researchers, and technologists. I conducted a series of studies with sixth-grade students to investigate the conditions under which guided critique of explanations can support revision.
    [Show full text]
  • Incorporating Socioscientific Issues Into a STEM Education Course
    Johnson et al. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary (2020) 2:9 https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-020-00026-3 Science Education Research RESEARCH Open Access Incorporating socioscientific issues into a STEM education course: exploring teacher use of argumentation in SSI and plans for classroom implementation Joseph Johnson1* , Augusto Z. Macalalag Jr2 and Julie Dunphy2 Abstract The Socioscientific Issue (SSI) framework was applied to explore how a team of two teachers navigated SSI cases as students in a STEM education graduate program. Using a case study approach, we found a connection between the specific SSI case and levels of scientific argumentation, as well as teachers’ plans for teaching. Our findings suggest successes and challenges for our teachers in incorporating scientific argumentation through SSI cases into his/her intended classroom practices. Specifically, our participating teachers displayed notably higher levels of claims, reasoning, and ability to question the sources of information, but lower levels of evidence and rebuttals. They had difficulty in connecting claims to evidence and reasoning in discussing the SSI cases. Moreover, their intended classroom implementation considered how to connect the lessons to their students’ lives, build scientific knowledge, and provide meaningful context to engage their students in the study of SSI. Keywords: SocioScientific issues, Teacher preparation, Argumentation Introduction The science, technology, engineering, and mathematics Socioscientific issues (SSI) are authentic, real world, science (STEM) disciplines and programs in schools are currently based controversial issues that, when studied, require stu- and typically taught in silos with less or no emphasis on so- dents to develop scientific content knowledge as well as cial and cultural experiences of students (Zeidler, 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • 1 JOANNA RADIN Yale University Section for the History of Medicine
    JOANNA RADIN Yale University Section for the History of Medicine 333 Cedar St, L132, New Haven, CT 06511 607-351-2222 [email protected] Employment Yale University (Effective July 1, 2018) Associate Professor (2012-2018) Assistant Professor Section of the History of Medicine (Primary) Program for History of Science and Medicine Department of History (courtesy) Department of Anthropology (courtesy) Department of American studies (courtesy) Program in Ethnicity, Race, and Migration (courtesy) Program in Religion and Modernity (courtesy) Education University of Pennsylvania PhD, History and Sociology of Science, 2012 MA, History and Sociology of Science, 2007 Cornell University MS, Science and Environmental Communication, 2004 BS, Communication, magna cum laude with Distinction in Research, 2002 Awards, Fellowships, and Honors 2017 John C. Burnham Early Career Award of the History of Science Society Forum for the History of the Human Sciences 2016 Poorvu Family Award for Interdisciplinary Teaching ($10,000) 2016-2017 Faculty Fellow, Center for Race, Indigeneity and Transnational Migration ($2,000) 2015 Yale MacMillan Center’s Kempf Fund Award ($12,000) Frederic W. Hilles Publication Fund ($1,500) 2015-2017 Fellow of the Whitney Center for the Humanities, Yale University 2014-2015 Visiting Fellow, Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Department II (Working group on Histories of Data) 2014 Newton Society Inductee of the Chemical Heritage Foundation, Philadelphia, PA 2011 Dissertation Completion Fellowship, UPenn School of Arts
    [Show full text]