Modeling is a core practice in science and a central part of scientific literacy. We present theoretical and empirical motivation for a learning progression for scientific modeling that aims to make the practice accessible and meaningful for learners. We define scientific modeling as including the elements of the practice (constructing, using, evaluating, and revising scientific models) and the metaknowledge that guides and motivates the practice (e.g., understanding the nature and purpose of models). Our learning progression for scientific modeling includes two dimensions that combine metaknowledge and elements of practice-scientific models as tools for predicting and explaining, and models change as understanding improves. We describe levels of progress along these two dimensions of our progression and illustrate them with classroom examples from 5th and 6th graders engaged in modeling. Our illustrations indicate that both groups of learners productively engaged in constructing and revising increasingly accurate models that included powerful explanatory mechanisms, and applied these models to make predictions for closely related phenomena. Furthermore, we show how students engaged in modeling practices move along levels of this progression. In particular, students moved from illustrative to explanatory models, and developed increasingly sophisticated views of the explanatory nature of models, shifting from models as correct or incorrect to models as encompassing explanations for multiple aspects of a target phenomenon. They also developed more nuanced reasons to revise models. Finally, we present challenges for learners in modeling practices-such as understanding how constructing a model can aid their own sensemaking, and seeing model building as a way to generate new knowledge rather than represent what they have already learned. ß 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 46: 632-654, 2009 Keywords: scientific modeling; learning progression; scientific practice; student learningResearch-based reforms in science education have emphasized the importance of engaging learners in scientific practices-social interactions, tools, and language that represent the disciplinary norms for how scientific knowledge is constructed, evaluated, and communicated (Duschl, Schweingruber, & Shouse, 2007). Involving learners in developing and investigating explanations and models leads to more sophisticated understanding of key models in science, as well as helping learners understand the nature of disciplinary knowledge (e.g., Lehrer & Schauble, 2006). Yet, scientific practices require shifts in traditional classroom norms that involve learners in knowledge building and negotiation (Berland & Reiser, 2009; Jimenenez-Aleixandre, Rodriguez, & Duschl, 2000;Lemke, 1990). For effective participation in scientific practices, teachers and students need support with the practices as well as with the scientific ideas addressed by the practice (Duschl et al., 2007).The MoDeLS project, Modeling Designs for Learning Scien...

Curriculum materials for Grades K-12 that are intended to promote teacher learning in addition to student learning have come to be called educative curriculum materials. How can K-12 curriculum materials be designed to best promote teacher learning? What might teacher learning with educative curriculum materials look like? The authors present a set of design heuristics for educative curriculum materials to further the principled design of these materials. They build from ideas about teacher learning and organize the heuristics around important parts of a teacher's knowledge base: subject matter knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge for topics, and pedagogical content knowledge for disciplinary practices. These heuristics provide a context for a theoretically oriented discussion of how features of educative curriculum materials may promote teacher learning, by serving as cognitive tools that are situated in teachers' practice. The authors explore challenges in the design of educative curriculum materials, such as the tension between providing guidance and choice.

No abstract

No abstract

Providing support focused on real challenges is critical in retaining highly qualified new science teachers, but the field lacks a systematic description of these teachers’ needs. The authors of this article examine the areas that science teachers are expected to understand: (1) the content and disciplines of science, (2) learners, (3) instruction, (4) learning environments, and (5) professionalism. They review the literature on challenges facing preservice and early-career science teachers, identify issues on which conventional wisdom is supported or called into question, and highlight the areas where the existing research is inadequate as a basis for generalization. For example, the authors found few studies on how new science teachers use curriculum materials or how they understand scientific inquiry. Their overview of challenges is followed by a discussion of how these teachers can be supported.

Journal of the Learning SciencesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:This classroom study, involving 178 middle school science students, investigates ways of prompting students for reflection. Reflection refers to both metacognition and sense-making. The primary research question is "Do students merely need to be prompted to reflect, or do they need guidance in reflecting productively?" Two types of reflection prompts are contrasted. The first type, called generic prompts, represents a view that asking students to "stop and think" will encourage reflection. The second type, called directed prompts, assumes that a generic request for reflection is insufficient, and that students should instead be provided with hints indicating potentially productive directions for their reflection. (Students in both conditions received identical activity prompts that helped them complete the project.) The results show that students in the generic prompt condition develop more coherent understandings as they work on a complex science project. Students reflect unproductively more often in response to directed prompts as compared to the generic prompts. These poor reflectors are less successful on the project than are other better reflectors. Students with some autonomy who received generic prompts develop more coherent understandings than do their similarly autonomous peers who receive directed prompts. The role of reflection in promoting multiple, complementary knowledge integration processes is described. The article concludes with a discussion of implications for both instruction and cognition, including strategies for promoting productive reflection in classroom situations.Historically, researchers have highlighted the importance of encouraging students

No abstract

No abstract