The Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University The Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University NSF #0937591 September 1, 2013 – August 31, 2014 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, 2013 to August 31, 2014 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.ȱ $QQXDO5HSRUWIRU$ZDUG 6HSWHPEHU$XJXVW 2. Table of Contents Project Summary ....................................................................................................................... 3 List of Center Participants, Advisory Boards, and Participating Institutions ............................ 5 Quantifiable Outputs – Table 1 ............................................................................................... 51 Mission, Significant Advances, and Broader Impacts ............................................................. 52 Highlights ................................................................................................................................ 68 Strategic Research Plan ........................................................................................................... 79 Research Program, Accomplishments, and Plans ................................................................... 83 a. RTTA 1 b. RTTA 2 c. RTTA 3 d. RTTA 4 e. TRC 1 f. TRC 2 g. VIRI Center Diversity – Progress and Plans .................................................................................. 121 Education ............................................................................................................................... 125 Outreach and Knowledge Transfer ........................................................................................ 143 Shared and Other Experimental Facilities ............................................................................. 153 Personnel ............................................................................................................................... 156 Publications and Patents ........................................................................................................ 161 Biographical Information ...................................................................................................... 294 Honors and Awards ............................................................................................................... 301 Fiscal Sections ....................................................................................................................... 302 Leverage ................................................................................................................................ 331 Current and Pending Support ................................................................................................ 342 $QQXDO5HSRUWIRU$ZDUG 6HSWHPEHU$XJXVW (2. Table of Contents continued) Tables Table 1 ..................................................................................................................................... 51 Table 2 ................................................................................................................................... 120 Table 3A ................................................................................................................................ 141 Table 3B ................................................................................................................................ 142 Table 4A ................................................................................................................................ 159 Table 4B ................................................................................................................................ 160 Table 5 ................................................................................................................................... 334 Table 6 ................................................................................................................................... 335 $QQXDO5HSRUWIRU$ZDUG 6HSWHPEHU$XJXVW 3. ProjectSummary Ȁ ȋȀǦȌ ǡǡ ǤǦ DzǦ dz ǡ ǡ Ǥ Ǧ ǡ ȋǦ ȌǤ Ǧ ǣͳǡ ǡ Ǣʹǡ ǡ Ǧ ǯ Ǣ͵ǡ ǡ Ǣ Ͷǡ ǡ Ǧ ǯ Ǥ ǡ ȋȌǡ ǡǣͳǡǡǢʹǡǡǡ ȋDzdzȌǤ ǯ Ǧ Ǥ Ǧ ǣͳȌ ǡ ǡ ǢʹȌ DzǦǦ dz ȋȌʹ ͳ Ǣ͵Ȍ ǦǢͶȌ ȋ Ȍ Ǥ ǣǦ ǢǦ Ǣ Ǧ Ǣ Ǧ Ǣ Ǣ ʹͲͷͲǦ Ǥ ǯ intellectualmeritǦ ǡ Ǥ ǡ ǡ ǡ ǦǤǯ ǡ Ǥ broaderimpactǡ ǡ ǡ ǡ ǡ ǡ Ǥ Ǧ ǡǡ Ǥ ǡ $QQXDO5HSRUWIRU$ZDUG 6HSWHPEHU$XJXVW Ǧ ǡ Ǧ ǡ ǡǡ ǡ ǡǡ Ǥ $QQXDO5HSRUWIRU$ZDUG 6HSWHPEHU$XJXVW 4.ListofCenterParticipants,AdvisoryBoards,andParticipatingInstitutions 4. (a) LIST OF CENTER PARTICIPANTS Participants receiving Center support: ASU Elizabeth Adams Faculty Associate Engin. Academic & Student Affairs Braden Allenby Professor Civil & Environmental Engineering Jean Andino Associate Professor Engineering Matter, Transport & Energy Moshe Apelas Associate Professor Engineering Computer Science Andrew Askland Director Center for Law, Science & Innovation Denise Baker Faculty Associate Social & Behavioral Sciences George Basile Executive Director Decision Theatre for a Desert City Ira Bennett Assistant Research Professor Consort. for Science, Policy & Outcomes Philip Bernick Assistant Professor English Mimmo Bonanni Associate Librarian Cyberinfrastructure Services Christopher Boone Professor Human Evolution & Social Change Prasad Boradkar Associate Professor Architecture & Landscape Architecture Katja Brundiers Academic Associate Global Institute of Sustainability Harvey Bryan Professor Architecture & Landscape Architecture Marilyn P. Carlson Professor Mathematics & Statistics Matthew Chew Faculty Associate Global Institute of Sustainability Nalini Chhetri Lecturer Global Institute of Sustainability Netra Chhetri Assistant Professor Consort. for Science, Policy & Outcomes David Conz Lecturer Letters & Sciences Elizabeth Corley Associate Professor Public Affairs Kevin Corley Assistant Professor Management Kurt Creager Executive Director Stardust Center Peter Crozier Professor Engineering Matter, Transport & Energy Sandwip Dey Professor Engineering Rodolfo Diaz Professor Electrical Engineering Chris Diehnelt Assistant Research Professor Biodesign Institute Gary Dirks Director LightWorks Travis Doom Program Specialist Consort. for Science, Policy & Outcomes Thomas Duening Director Entrepreneurial Programs Terrie Lee Ekin Director CLAS Research Administration Karin Ellison Associate Director Biology & Society James Elser Regents’ Professor Life Sciences Scott Endsley Vice President System Design for Quality Improvement Sandy Epstein Sr. Mgr. Strategic Bus. Dev. Decision Theatre Joseph Eschrich Coordinator Sr., Res. & Ops. Center for Science & the Imagination Timothy Eschrich Process Engrg. Manager Ctr. for Solid State Electronics Research Mahmud Farooque Associate Director Consort. for Science, Policy & Outcomes Tricia Farwell Professor Journalism & Mass Communication Edward Finn Director/Assistant Professor Arts, Media and Engineering Adelheid Fischer Staff Innovation Space Erik Fisher Assistant Professor Political Science Matthew Fraser Associate Professor Sustainable Engrg. & Built Environment Sylvain Gallais Clinical Professor Languages & Cultures Joel Garreau Lincoln Professor of Law Law $QQXDO5HSRUWIRU$ZDUG 6HSWHPEHU$XJXVW Alexandra Gino Faculty Associate Consort. for Science, Policy & Outcomes Jay Golden Assistant Professor Global Institute of Sustainability Aaron Golub Assistant Professor Geographical Sciences & Urban Planning Deborah Gonzalez Chief Academic Officer University Public Schools Stephen Goodnick Professor Electrical Engineering Gisela Grant Internship Coordinator Politics & Global Studies Kimberly Grout Coordinator Senior Global institute of Sustainability Subhro Guhathakurta Professor Geographical Sciences & Urban Planning Devens Gust Professor Chemistry & Biochemistry David H. Guston Professor Political Science Ed Hackett Professor Human Evolution & Social Change Rolf Halden Associate Professor Biodesign Institute Mark Hannah Assistant Professor English Jiping He Professor Bioengineering Renata Hejduk Associate Professor Architecture & Landscape Architecture Stephen Helms Tillery Assistant Professor Bioengineering Mark Henderson Professor Engineering Kirsten Hendrickson Lecturer Chemistry & Biochemistry Joseph Herkert Lincoln Associate Professor Humanities & Arts James Hershauer Professor Management William Heywood Assistant Clinical Professor Design Lori Hidinger Managing Director Consort. for Science, Policy & Outcomes Keith Hjelmstad Professor Sustainable Engrg. & Built Environment Chong Ho Yu Systems Analysis ALTI Research & Outreach Kiril Hristovski Assistant Professor Technology & Innovation Ben Hurlbut Assistant Professor Life Sciences Mary Ingram-Water Lecturer Barrett Honors College Minu Ipe Clinical Associate Professor WPC Management Marco Janssen Associate Professor Ctr. for Study of Institutional Diversity John Johnson Emeritus Professor Social Transformation Paul Johnson Dean Engineering Erik Johnston Assistant Professor Public Affairs Stephen Johnston Professor Biodesign Institute Christopher Jones Assistant Professor History Kamil Kaloush Associate Professor Sustainable Engrg. & Built
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]
  • 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.
    [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]