Assessing Science Learning in 3 Part Harmony

1
Assessing Science Learning in 3 Part Harmony

• Richard Duschl
• GSE-Rutgers University
• rduschl_at_rci.rutgers.edu

2
Performances - Practices

• Piano
• Finger/hand strength and flexibility
• Read muscial notation
• Musical phrasing, playing with feeling
• Creative musicality

• Science
• Building conceptual claims, meanings
• Evaluating conceptual claims, meaning
• Seeking evidence
• Seeking explanations
• Communicating

3
3 Ps
Psychology - Learning Cognitive Science,
Information-processing, Social psychology,
Activity theory Philosophy - Knowledge Epistemolog
y Science Studies Models, Argumentation
(ETHICS) Pedagogy - Teaching Inquiry Learning
Problem-based Learning Community of Learners
Model-based Learning Design Principles,
Preparation for Future Learning
4
Nature of Science

• Science is about testing hypotheses and reasoning
  deductively from experiments
• Hypothetico/Deductive Science
• Science is Theory building and revision
• Contexts of Generation and Justification
• Science is Model building and revision
• Models stand between Experiment and Theory

5
History of Thinking about Human Mind

• Differential Perspective
• Individual, Mental Tests separate from academic
  learning - selecting and sorting
• Behavioral Perspective
• Stimulus/Response Associations - rewarding and
  punishing
• Cognitive Perspective
• Prior Knowledge, expert/novice, metacognition
  (thinking about thinking and knowning)
• Situative Perspective
• Sociocultural, language, tools, discourse

6
Psychology Education
Structured Knowledge Prior Knowledge
Metacognition Procedural Knowledge in
Meaningful Contexts Social participation and
cognition Holistic Situation for Learning Make
Thinking Overt (Glaser, 1994)
7
National Science Education Standards Content
Domains

• Big Cs
• Life Science
• Physical Science
• Earth/Space Science
• Inquiry

• Little Cs
• Unifying Principles Themes
• Science Technology
• Science in Personal Social Contexts
• Nature of Science

8
Standards Benchmarks

• Too Much Stuff

9
3 Part Harmony

• Conceptual what we need to know
• Epistemic rules for deciding what counts
• Social communicating representing ideas,
  evidence and explanations

10
(No Transcript)
11
Learning ProgressionsLearning Performances

12
NAEP 2009 Science Framework

• http//www.nagb.org/
• A learning progression is a sequence of
  successively more complex ways of reasoning about
  a set of ideas.

13
(No Transcript)
14
Why Things Sink Float

• Density LP - Floating Straws
• Relative Density
• Density
• Mass
• Volume

• Forces LP - Floating Vessels
• Flotation
• Buoyancy
• Pressure
• Mass
• Surface Area
• Volume
• Displacement

15
Conceptual vs. Epistemic Goals

• Misconception
• Structured Problem
• Control of Variables
• Productive Misconceptions
• Unconventional Feature
• Off Target

• Causal Explanation
• Ill structured problem
• Design Application
• Modeling
• Forecast Items (Pivotal Cases, Linn)

16
Learning Goals

• What we know
• How we have come to know it
• Why we believe it over alternatives

17
(No Transcript)
18
Affordances for Future Learning

• Knowledge in Use
• Density - continental drift, ocean currents
• Forces - water pressure and neutral buoyancy
• Using Scientific Inquiry
• Density - separation of liquids
• Forces - carrying capacity/displacement
• Using Technological Design
• Density - test of Crown Jewels - Eureka!
• Forces - retrieval of sunken ships

19
Nature of ExplanationsLanguage of Science

• Principled
• Relational
• Unclear Relational
• Experiential
• Inadequate Explanation
• Off Target

• Evidence-Explanation
• Patterns in Evidence
• Explanatory Theory
• Balance of Forces
• Stronger Hands
• More Hands

20
Affordances

• Making Thinking visible
• Teacher Assessments of Conceptual, Epistemic,
  Social Goals
• Identification of Productive Misconceptions
• Dialogic Discourse
• Measures/Observations-Data-Evidence-Models-Theory
• Data-Warrant-Backing-Rebuttal-Qualifier-Conclusion
  
• Images for Nature of Science
• Science as Experiments as Theory-building as
  Model-building
• Preparation for Future Learning

21
Scaffolding and Assessing Argumentation Processes
in Science
Kings College London/American School in
London Collaborator Kirsten Ellenbogen NSF via a
seed grant from CILT (Center for Innovations in
Learning Technology).
22
EHH Activity Sequence
Intro Unit and Lab 1 Conduct prelab including
demonstration of STEP test and taking a pulse.
Students collect data Lab 1 2. Data Collection
for Labs 2 and 3 Lab 2 - Activity Level and Heart
Rate Lab 3 - Weight and Heart Rate 3. Data
Analysis for Labs 2 and 3 Knowledge Forum
Activity What Matters in Getting Good
Data Determining Trends and Patterns of
Data Developing and Evaluating Explanations for
the Patterns of Data 4. Evaluating Exercise
Programs
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
Group Decision Rules
1 - Frequency 2 - Majority 3 - Average 4 -
Endpoints 5 - Calculation
26
Pathways - Historical Steps

• Rochel Gelman Kim Brennenman - Pathsways for
  Learning -PreK
• Observe
• Measure
• Write

• Lehrer Schauble 5th-8th grades
• Variation
• Distribution
• Growth Mechanisms
• Adaptive Selection
• Evolution

27
Observation-Evidence

• There exists a continuum of what counts as
  scientific data, and subsequently what counts as
  scientific evidence. From initial sense-based
  descriptive observations, to tool assisted
  measurement observations, and to theory-driven
  instrument based observations. The latter most
  sophisticated level underscores the
  revision-based and theory-laden nature of
  science.

28
Evidence-based Argumentation

• There exists a continuum regarding the use of
  evidence to support and refute scientific claims,
  and the structure and practice of argumentation
  (language of argumentation and role of
  consensus). Initial arguments feature a simple
  single claim-evidence structure, with learning
  arguments develop to include counter claims and
  counterevidence with attention to resolving
  alternative explanation and informing theory.

29
Theory-building

• There exists a continuum of sophistication
  regarding the use of evidence and explanations to
  develop, refine and modify scientific theories.
  Initially students may not discriminate between
  evidence and theory. With engagement and learning
  opportunities students can refine and deepen
  their understanding and practices of the
  relationships between evidence and explanations.
  Sophisticated images of the nature of science
  conceptualize theories as robust explanatory
  schemes comprised of multiple models, models that
  stand between evidence and explanation.

30
Inquiry Based Learning

• Deciding the Content
• Aims Goals
• Conceptual
• Facts, Principles, Laws Theories
• Epistemic
• Explanations, Models, Arguments
• Social
• Representations, Communications

• Deciding the Context
• School Science
• Real World Science
• Environment
• Social Issues
• Museum/Science Centre Science

31
3 Part Harmony

• Conceptual Goals
• Epistemic Goals
• Social Goals

32
Thank You