In this article we assert a potential research agenda for the teaching and learning of science as inquiry as part of the JRST series on reform in science education. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of cognitive and sociocultural constructivism, cultural models of meaning, the dialogic function of language, and transformational models of teacher education, we propose that more research is needed in the areas of teachers' beliefs, knowledge, and practices of inquiry-based science, as well as, student learning. Because the ef®cacy of reform efforts rest largely with teachers, their voices need to be included in the design and implementation of inquiry-based curriculum. As we review the literature and pose future research questions, we propose that particular attention be paid to research on inquiry in diverse classrooms, and to modes of inquiry-based instruction that are designed by teachers. ß
This article presents and discusses preliminary research on a new heuristic tool for learning from laboratory activities in secondary science. The tool, called the science writing heuristic, can be used by teachers as a framework from which to design classroom activities. Theoretically, the science writing heuristic represents a bridge between traditional laboratory reports and types of writing that promote personal construction of meaning. Two eighth-grade classes participated in using the science writing heuristic during an 8-week stream study. The teacher and one of the researchers collaboratively developed activities based on the science writing heuristic that the teacher implemented. Nineteen target students were studied in depth. Characteristics of report writing and students' understanding of the nature of science were investigated, using interpretive techniques. There is evidence that use of the science writing heuristic facilitated students to generate meaning from data, make connections among procedures, data, evidence, and claims, and engage in metacognition. Students' vague understandings of the nature of science at the beginning of the study were modified to more complex, rich, and specific understandings. The implications of the study for writing in science classrooms is discussed.
This article explores the history and theoretical paradigms associated with writing to learn in science, including the debate surrounding the teaching of traditional scientific genres that has received attention in Australia and the United Kingdom. It is asserted that unique features of writing in traditional scientific genres, such as experiment, explanation, and report, promote reflection and the production of new knowledge, especially through the formation of meaningful inferences for data. The author presents sample data illustrating the potential for meaningful learning associated with writing in communicative genres, considers the limited potential of creative writing for developing scientific understandings, and recasts a description of scientific genres in light of contemporary classroom practices.
This article explores the history and theoretical paradigms associated with writing to learn in science, including the debate surrounding the teaching of traditional scientific genres that has received attention in Australia and the United Kingdom. It is asserted that unique features of writing in traditional scientific genres, such as experiment, explanation, and report, promote reflection and the production of new knowledge, especially through the formation of meaningful inferences for data. The author presents sample data illustrating the potential for meaningful learning associated with writing in communicative genres, considers the limited potential of creative writing for developing scientific understandings, and recasts a description of scientific genres in light of contemporary classroom practices.
In this investigation, three classes of ninth‐grade general science students participated in a collaborative report‐writing intervention. The purpose of this portion of the study was to evaluate students' collaboratively written laboratory reports for evidence of the use of scientific reasoning skills and to document qualitative changes in reasoning skill use over time. The participants in the study were 6 ninth‐grade students, representing three collaborative writing pairs. During the intervention, students wrote 10 laboratory reports over a 4.5‐month period. The author and classroom teacher designed report guideline prompts to scaffold students in the use of relevant scientific reasoning skills. The results indicated that students used reasoning skills to assess their current models of scientific understanding, make observations, interpret the meaning of results, and generate new models based on their data and relevant information. Participants showed the most improvement in writing that reflected the reasoning skills of (a) selecting and processing textbook passages, (b) drawing conclusions and formulating models, and (c) comparing/contrasting. Over time, participants improved their ability to compose explanations that represented a synthesis of prior knowledge, activity observations, and other sources of information. Collaborative writing encouraged students to construct their own understandings of science concepts by creating an environment in which thinking, reasoning, and discussion were valued.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.