Guiding explanation construction by children at the entry points of learning progressions

Abstract

Policy documents in science education suggest that even at the earliest years of formal schooling, students are capable of constructing scientific explanations about focal content. Nonetheless, few research studies provide insights into how to effectively provide scaffolds appropriate for late elementary‐age students' fruitful creation of scientific explanations. This article describes two research studies to address the question, what makes explanation construction difficult for elementary students? The studies were conducted in urban fourth, fifth, and sixth grade classrooms where students were learning science through curricular units that contained 8 weeks of scaffold‐rich activities focused on explanation construction. The first study focused on the kind and amount of information scaffold‐rich assessments provided about young students' abilities to construct explanations under a range of scaffold conditions. Results demonstrated that fifth and sixth grade tests provided strong information about a range of students' abilities to construct explanations under a range of supported conditions. On balance, the fourth grade test did not provide as much information, nor was this test curricular‐sensitive. The second study provided information on pre–post test achievement relative to the amount of curricular intervention utilized over the 8‐week time period with each cohort. Results demonstrated that when taking the amount of the intervention into account, there were strong learning gains in all three grade‐level cohorts. In conjunction with the pre–post study, a type‐of‐error analysis was conducted to better understand the nature of errors among younger students. This analysis revealed that our youngest students generated the most incomplete responses and struggled in particular ways with generating valid evidence. Conclusions emphasize the synergistic value of research studies on scaffold‐rich assessments, curricular scaffolds, and teacher guidance toward a more complete understanding of how to support young students' explanation construction. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 49: 141–165, 2012

Linking a learning progression for natural selection to teachers' enactment of formative assessment

“…Clearly, learning progressions need to be accompanied by other supports to help teachers adapt their instructional practices. For example, Songer and Gotwals (2012) have developed learning progressions that combine scientific concepts with the scientific practices that support them. Similarly, Furtak et al (2012) have argued that learning progressions should be included in suites of tools that help teachers to adopt new practices.…”

“…In recent years, learning progressions have been developed for multiple purposes, such as frameworks for assessment development, guides for curriculum design, and scaffolds for teaching practices (see Alonzo & Gotwals, 2012; Corcoran et al, 2009). These progressions span a wide range of foci, including chemistry (Johnson & Tymms, 2011), atomic molecular theory (Smith, Wiser, Anderson, & Krajcik, 2006), genetics (Duncan, Rogat, & Yarden, 2009), celestial motion (Plummer & Krajcik, 2010), the nature of matter (Stevens, Delgado, & Krajcik, 2010), the development of scientific practices (Berland & McNeill, 2010; Songer & Gotwals, 2012), and ambitious science teaching (Thompson, Braaten, & Windschitl, 2009).…”

“…The second type of learning progression, which Shavelson (2009) called the “cognition and instruction” type, maps out a progression for how students come to understand scientific concepts from naïve, everyday ideas to scientifically accurate. Songer and Gotwals (2012), among others, have argued that learning progressions should not represent content alone, but should be in some way integrated with scientific practices that support student learning of science ideas.…”

Proficiency in Science: Assessment Challenges and Opportunities

“…(22), and BioKids projects (23). Several of these projects illustrate the feasibility of designing tasks and situations, whether in paper-and-pencil format or mediated via simulations embedded in technology, that challenge students to reason with and about core science concepts in life and physical science.…”

Appropriating Epistemic Norms of Science through Sustained Practice with Argumentation: Can It Happen? A Learning Progressions Perspective

“…As a result, students invested limited effort in elaborating on their justifications. The importance of teacher framing has been shown to greatly influence the quality of arguments produced by students (Berland & Hammer, 2012;Kelly & Chen, 1999;Songer, & Wenk Gotwals, 2012). For instance, found that students construct high quality arguments when their teachers provide an explicit rationale for the importance of argumentation and provide the necessary guidance and scaffolding for them to construct scientific arguments.…”