Investigating Essential Characteristics of Scientific Practices in Elementary Science Learning Environments: The Practices of Science Observation Protocol (P‐SOP)

Abstract

Within the field of science education, there remains little agreement as to the definition and characteristics of classroom inquiry. The emerging emphasis on scientific practices in science education reform discourse is underpinned by a need to better articulate the constituent elements of inquiry‐based science. While a small number of observation‐based instruments have been developed to characterize science learning environments, few are explicitly aligned with theoretical constructs articulated by the National Research Council and/or have been substantially field‐tested. We employ a newly developed instrument, the Practices of Science Observation Protocol (P‐SOP), to investigate essential features of inquiry and scientific practices in which early learners engage in elementary classrooms. This research is part of a multiyear professional development program designed to support elementary teachers (K‐5) in a large, urban school district to learn to better engage students in scientific practices. Project teachers video‐recorded enacted science lessons (n = 124) which were used as data. Findings illustrate both essential features of inquiry and scientific practices observed in elementary classrooms, as well as establish the P‐SOP as a valid and reliable observation protocol. These findings have important implications for the design of elementary science learning environments and associated research and development efforts in the field.

Intersection of argumentation and the use of multiple representations in the context of socioscientific issues

“…Research in the area of employing argumentation in classrooms has grown exponentially in the last few decades (Bathgate, Crowell, Schunn, Cannady, & Dorph, 2015;Berland & Hammer, 2012;Berland & Reiser, 2011;Erduran et al, 2004;Forbes, Biggers, & Zangori, 2013;Garcia-Mila, Gilabert, Erduran, & Felton, 2013;McNeill & Knight, 2013;Nielsen, 2012;Osborne, Simon, Christodoulou, Howell-Richardson, & Richardson, 2013;Sampson, Enderle, Grooms, & Witte, 2013;Tal, Kali, Magid, & Madhok, 2011;Zohar & Nemet, 2002). In the following, we further elaborate on two aspects: the use of representations to mediate argumentation and the use of argumentation to mediate further use of multiple representations.…”

Análisis de la comunicación de experiencias indagadoras presentadas en congresos de ciencias dirigidos a alumnos de Educación Infantil y Primaria

“…Para cumplir este objetivo, se construye una herramienta de análisis basada en estudios de modelos de indagación realizados previamente (Etkina et al 2006;Forbes et al 2013;Pedaste et al 2015;Sawada et al 2002) (Anexo, tabla 1). Esta herramienta se estructura en cinco criterios que abarcan las diferentes etapas y habilidades que son consideradas esenciales en el desarrollo de una indagación científica: i) orientación de la actividad; ii) ideas preliminares; iii) planificación de la indagación; iv) interpretación y modelización; y v) comunicación, discusión, conclusiones y reflexión.…”

“…De hecho, esta contextualización aparece con mayor frecuencia en aquellas comunicaciones en las que queda patente que son los propios estudiantes quienes presentan la iniciativa y deciden qué cuestión quieren investigar (70.6%, figura 2). Entendemos que, en estos casos, los estudiantes muestran una mayor motivación por la investigación y les resulta más sencillo relacionarla con su entorno más cercano (Forbes et al 2013). Sin embargo, en las comunicaciones donde se explicita que el docente es quien plantea la pregunta investigable (13.2%) existe una relación inversa con la contextualización de la actividad (tabla 2b).…”

Studying Science Teacher Identity

“…We have been engaged in line of research focused on preservice and inservice elementary teachers' use of science curriculum materials to foster reform-based science learning environments and support students' learning (e.g., Biggers & Forbes, 2012;Biggers, Forbes, & Zangori, 2013;Forbes, 2011;Forbes & Davis, 2010a;2010b;Forbes, Biggers, & Zangori, 2013;Zangori, Forbes, & Biggers, 2013). This body of work has included two studies specifically investigating elementary teachers' curricular role identity for science (Forbes & Davis, 2012;.…”

“…We have extensively studied both preservice and inservice elementary teachers' knowledge of scientific practices and inquiry (Biggers & Forbes, 2012;Biggers et al, 2013;Forbes, 2011;Zangori et al, 2013). These studies, involving over 100 prospective and practicing elementary teachers, have been conducted in elementary science teacher education, K-5 classrooms, and science professional development contexts.…”