Science Instructional Framework DRAFT

Table of Contents

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………...A historical overview of the Woodburn School District’s (WSD) journey into and through science.

4-6

A Definition and Rationale for Science …………………………………………………………….. 7-8

Philosophy…………………………………………………………………………………………………………A brief statement that identifies the philosophical underpinnings and research of science in Woodburn.

9

Dimensions of Science………………………………………………………………………………………..A definition of science, the cross cutting concepts and the 8 science and engineering practices.

● Nature of Science● Cross Cutting Concepts● 8 Science and Engineering Practices

10-14

Methodology…………………………………………………………………………………………………….An explanation of the systems and processes that support our philosophy.

15-17

Methods……………………………………………………………………………………………………………An overview of methods for the implementation of effective science instruction.

Organization …………………………………………………………………………………………………….An overview of the scheduling of possible routines within a science classroom.

Planning tool Public Representations Discourse

Assessment …………………………………………………………………………………………………….An overview of the types of formative, summative, proficiency and portfolio assessments that are used specifically in Woodburn inform science instruction.

Q&A …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..Woodburn School District reading norms on a variety of topics in Q&A format.

References ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..An annotated list of resources that support various components of the WSD

2

instructional framework.

Glossary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….A short dictionary of terminology used throughout the document.

3

Introduction

Historically, Woodburn School District (WSD) has supported and valued the contributions of science education. Prior to the mid 90’s, teachers were given the charge of determining what to teach without the support of standards. Science was a subject that was required in grades 7 through 12. In 1991, an effort was made to develop a curriculum for grade 6. At this time, classes were textbook driven and topical in nature as teachers worked to cover the various domains of scientific information.

In 1996, at the onset of Woodburn’s English Transition Program (later to be changed to the Dual Language Program), WSD conducted a textbook adoption and for the first time sought out materials in Spanish. Following the publishing of the National Science Education Standards in 1996, Oregon state standards followed suit. The textbooks that had been purchased no longer matched the standards that teachers were to teach. The new standards were numerous and still very topic driven.

In the subsequent years, teachers were given a great deal of latitude in the purchasing of instructional materials and curriculum design. At a national level the tides were changing with the initiation of Project 2061 that pushed science education to look more like the work of actual scientists and include the inquiry process.

In 2004, WSD secondary science teachers worked together to research best practices in leading student inquiry. The subsequent year, teachers continued their research and expanded it to include a quest for materials that aligned to inquiry-based instructional methods. In 2005, the same year that Pluto was demoted to a protoplanet, new inquiry-based textbooks made their debut in secondary classrooms across the district.

In 2007 the state science standards changed yet again. That same year, elementary schools adopted and piloted science materials.

Between 2007 and 2013 the rigor of many high school science classes was increased to include credit for college.

In April of 2013, the Next Generation Science Standards were published and in June, science teachers from middle level worked to scope and sequence the new standards and determine gaps in their current materials.

In February of 2014, WSD launched an effort to develop a unified approach to science instruction across the district. The instructional framework process has been comprised of an initial drafting of the document by teachers with representation from all grade bands. The

4

document has then been vetted three times by teams from K-5, 6-8, and 9-12. The following document is the result of this work:

● Document the WSD’s philosophical beliefs about science instruction,● Guide the district initiatives in science and professional development through a

continuous cycle of inquiry and research,● Outline a methodology to guide our practice, and● Provide clear pedagogy and practices for teachers to utilize in classrooms.

Participants:

Administrators Teachers Facilitator

Laurie Cooper Simi WaageRachel FranklinNeil WilhelmJonathan PopeMolly CharnesChris KresinKarin TeylerSeth Stoddard

Lena Baucum

5

Long range goals:● Standards by grade level● Scope and sequence● Unit development ● Materials adoption

Elementary Middle High

2013-14 All coaches and principals receive exposure to science IF and standards (heavy emphasis on interconnectivity of Science, math and LA standards.

Finalize scope and sequence for grades 6-8

2014-15 All teachers are provided time to read and discuss standards and Instructional Framework

Create scope and sequence for grades K-2

Start unit development 6-8

2015-16 K-2 Begin Unit Development

Create scope and sequence for grades 3-5

2016-17 K-2 teaches ⅓ of unitsK-2 Continues Unit Development

3-5 Begin Unit Development

2017-18 K-2 teaches ⅔ of unitsK-2 Continues Unit Development

3-5 Teaches ⅓ of units3-5 Continues Unit Development

2018-19 K-2 teaches all units

3-5 Teaches ⅔ of units3-5 Continues Unit Development

2019-20 3-5 teaches all units

6

Definition of Science and Rationale

“There is no doubt that science--- and, therefore, science education----is central to the lives of all Americans. Never before has our world been so complex and science knowledge so critical to making sense of it all. When comprehending current events, choosing and using technology, or making informed decisions about one’s health care, science understanding is key.” (NGSS, Executive Summary, 2013)

Although the nature of science in the real world has changed little over the past decade, the practice of

science education has changed drastically as the United States has begun to shift science education to

reflect the real work of scientists in the field. No longer should we see science education as a collection

of information to be memorized with sporadic labs to provoke curiosity. Instead science education is a

study of an ever-evolving body of knowledge through study and practices. Science refers to a system of

acquiring knowledge. This system uses observation and experimentation to describe and explain

phenomena.

7

Scientists, and therefore students, create models of reality and using methods of investigation, and

modify and revise those models over time. In science, students are now expected to grapple with real

world problems and to use the same methods that scientists and engineers use.

In the modern world, some knowledge of science is essential for everyone. It is an integral part of basic

education for the following reasons:

Science is a significant part of human culture and represents one of the pinnacles of

human thinking capacity.

It provides a laboratory of common experience for development of language, logic, and

problem-solving skills in the classroom.

A democracy demands that its citizens make personal and community decisions about

issues in which scientific information plays a fundamental role, and they hence need

knowledge of science as well as an understanding of scientific methodology.

For some students, it will become a lifelong vocation or avocation.

The nation is dependent on the technical and scientific abilities of its citizens for its

economic competitiveness and national needs.

(Citation, ????)

8

Philosophy

Science is a process of logical reasoning about evidence, a process of theory change, and the

participation in a culture of scientific practices (National Research Council, 2007). Students

learn these processes best when their interests, experiences, and innate curiosity about the

world around them are used to answer relevant questions. (Piaget, ___ ). Teachers combine

constructivist approaches (Piaget, ___; Vygotsky, ___) and the practices of scientific inquiry

(___, ___) to convert students’ innate curiosity into scientific understanding. Students practice

interpreting what they see and hear in the light of their own schemas (Piaget,___) as they work

to make sense of the world around them. Students skillfully participate in a learning

environment that mimics the scientific community (___, ___) wherein students master

productive ways of representing ideas, using scientific tools, and interacting with peers about

science ideas and principles. (Putting Research to Work in K-8 Science Classrooms, pg. 21).

Students practice scientific discourse and argumentation as a means of developing scientific

reasoning, concepts, and language. Students produce and revise models that represent their

evolving ideas and allow for making thinking visible and developing critical thinking skills

(National Research Council, 2008). (Ready, Set, Science, Chapter 5) Students use metacognition

to evaluate and reflect on both their evolving scientific models and their use of the science and

engineering practices. (Dewey J. How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective

Thinking to the Educative Process. Boston: Heath; 1933)

9

Methodology

In order to fulfill our district philosophy of science and meet the learning needs of all students,

we simultaneously employ Model-Based Inquiry, the Gradual Release of Responsibility through

levels of inquiry and Sheltered Instruction. These three methodologies are explained

individually in some detail in the following:

Model-Based Inquiry

“Modeling is the process by which scientists represent ideas about the natural world to each other, and

then collaboratively make changes to these representations over time in response to new evidence and

understandings” (tools4teachingscience.org , 2013). Explanatory models can be represented by

drawings, diagrams, flow charts, equations, graphs, computer simulations, or even physical replicas.

From the past twenty years of research on learning, we know that students make dramatic advances in

their understanding of science by generating and revising explanatory models. For both scientists and

students, modeling is something done publicly and collaboratively; it organizes and guides many other

forms of practice, and importantly it opens up opportunities to reason about ideas, data, arguments,

and new questions.

“Regardless of how models are conceptualized, they generally emerge from some contextual

phenomenon such as an event, a question, or a problem. They involve identifying key features or

attributes of the phenomenon, and they specify how they are related” (Romberg et al., 2005) (Cited

from Windschitl, 2007).

“Inquiry instruction supports a constructivist approach to learning science. According to this approach,

learning is a construction [that is] based on the learner’s prior knowledge. Students take in information

from many sources, including personal discoveries and acquisitions from teachers, books, videos, and

other resources. But in constructing understanding, students must connect new information to their

existing knowledge and experiences, reorganize their knowledge structures [models] and assimilate new

information to them [revise their models], and construct meaning for themselves (Lucks-Horsley et al.,

1998).

Although learners are the ones who construct knowledge, in inquiry instruction teachers are active in

the progress. Teachers provide for new experiences of the natural world, encourage wonder, help

10

students form questions that can be investigated, help them plan investigation strategies, provide

materials for investigations, interact with students as they investigate, assist them in organizing and

making sense of the data, provide direct instruction on concepts, principles, and theories, and guide

them in constructing scientific explanations.” (Bass, Contant, & Carin, 2009)

Gradual Release of Responsibility

The gradual release of responsibility is an instructional design that allows teachers to make sense of the

various levels of teacher support that students may require. “Any academic task can be conceptualized

as requiring differing portions of teacher and student responsibility for successful completion. The

diagonal line on the graph (Figure __) represents a journey from total teacher responsibility (on the far

left) to total student responsibility (on the far right). When the teacher is taking all or most of the

responsibility for task completion, he is ‘modeling’ or demonstrating the desired application of some

strategy. When the student is taking all or most of that responsibility, she is ‘practicing’ or ‘applying’

that strategy. What comes in between those two extremes is the gradual release of responsibility from

teacher to student “(p. 34-35).

“The hope in the model is that every student gets to the point where she is able to accept total

responsibility for the task, including the responsibility for determining whether or not she is applying the

strategy appropriately (i.e. self-monitoring). But the model assumes that she will need some guidance in

11

reaching that stage of independence and it is precisely the teacher’s role to provide such guidance”

(p.35). The model is in a sense a planning of obsolescence in that because it is the goal of the teacher to

become obsolete. However, the role of the teacher cannot be diminished as the teacher gradually

releases the task responsibility to students. (Pearson &Gallagher, 1983)

Levels of Science Inquiry

Science instruction that is inquiry based uses the levels of science inquiry to move students from

heavy teacher dependence to independence. The four levels align to the gradual release of

responsibility. Researchers in the 1960s to 1970s developed a tool for determining the level of

inquiry in any given science activity. The tool is known as Herron’s Scale and describes four

levels of inquiry: exploration, directed, guided, and open-ended. (Herron, 1971) In science,

these levels of inquiry are the student scaffolds to scientific inquiry.

Level 1. Exploration

During these activities, students are given the question and instructions about how to go

about answering the question. Students are already familiar with the concepts being

presented, and they already know the answer to the question being asked. These

activities can serve as an advanced organizer for the learning to come and allows

teachers to tap students’ prior knowledge about the concepts. Exploration activities

often create experiences that cause students to become more curious and ask more

questions.

Level 2. Direct Inquiry

In direct inquiry, the problem and procedure are given directly, but the students are left

to reach their own conclusions. Students investigate a problem presented by the

teacher and use a procedure that is prescribed by the teacher. They have the

opportunity to analyze data and arrive at their own evidence-based conclusions.

Level 3. Guided Inquiry

In guided inquiry, the research problem or question is provided, but students are left to

devise their own methods and solutions. Students take more responsibility during this

12

type of inquiry. They may choose their materials, data organization, and approach to

analysis. They apply their analytical skills and support their evidence-based conclusions.

Level 4. Open-Ended Inquiry

At this level of inquiry, problems as well as methods and solutions are left open. The

goal is for students to take full responsibility for all aspects of the investigation. These

activities involve students in formulating their own research questions, developing

procedures to answer these research questions, collecting and analyzing data, and using

evidence to reach their own conclusions. (Lederman, 2009)

Sheltered instruction

The vocabulary-dense environment of science can be a challenge for any student to navigate. Explicit

teaching of vocabulary and the scaffolding of both expressive and receptive language is necessary for

all students to make sense of the content. Sheltered Instruction has two charges: to provide access to

core content through ensuring that students receive comprehensible input and to scaffold language

production so that all students develop academic competence. (Krashen, 1985) For students to

communicate effectively in the inquiry process, we must provide language support and explicit literacy

skill instruction to enable students to acquire the skills necessary to access complex science texts.

Scaffolded language support may include: structures for classroom discourse, explicit vocabulary

instruction and practice, supplementing varying levels of background knowledge, visual & contextual

clues to connect vocabulary to concepts and providing language stems for expressive language.

13

Methods

Science Learning Cycle

“Recent research reports, such as How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (Bransford,

Brown & Cocking, 2000) and its companion, How Students Learn: Science in the Classroom (Donovan &

Bransford, 2005), have confirmed what educators have asserted for many years: The sustained use of an

effective, research-based instructional model can help students learn fundamental concepts in science

and other domains.

As such Woodburn School District uses the work of Robert Karplus and his colleagues who proposed and

used an instructional model based on the work of

Piaget. This model would eventually be called the

Learning Cycle. (Atkin & Karplus, 1962).

Numerous studies have shown that the learning

cycle as a model of instruction is far superior to

transmission models in which students are

passive receivers of knowledge from their teacher

(Bybee, 1997). As an instructional model, the

learning cycle provides the active learning

experiences recommended by the National

Science Education Standards (National Research

Council, 1996).

Karplus’ learning cycle has been adapted by textbook companies and is called the 5E

Instructional Model or the 5Es, and consists of similar phases: engagement,

exploration, explanation, elaboration, and evaluation presented in a linear fashion.

Woodburn uses the phases of the Learning Cycle due to the fact that evaluation is ongoing as students

create, reflect on, and revise models. Additionally, the phases of engagement, exploration, explanation,

and elaboration are flexible components that may be employed dependent upon the needs of students

and their interaction with the content. Each phase has a specific function and contributes to the

14

Add metacognition outside of evaluation.

teacher’s coherent instruction and to the learners’ formulation of a better understanding of scientific

and technological knowledge, attitudes, and skills. Once internalized, it also can be used flexibly to

inform the many instantaneous decisions that science teachers must make in classroom situations”

(Rodger W. Bybee, 2006).

Engagement: Students are presented with unfamiliar phenomena, objects, events and/or questions to pique their curiosity and have them make connections with what they already know. During the engagement phase, students become mentally and physically engaged. They raise questions, identify problems to solve, and consider plans to find answers to their questions. Teachers are able to ascertain prior knowledge and elicit misconceptions.

Exploration: During this phase, students are provided with a common base of experiences. They actively examine and manipulate objects and phenomena through direct investigations organized by the teacher.

Explanation: During this phase, students explain their understanding of the concepts and processes they have been exploring. They have opportunities to verbally explain new concepts and/or demonstrate new skills and abilities. Students are asked to explain and conclude during and after every investigation. Students are prompted to explain “how they know” their predictions make sense and to anticipate what they would do differently “next time.”

Elaboration: In this phase of the model, students are given opportunities to apply concepts in new contexts or situations in order to develop deeper understandings. Students take part in activities that extend conceptual understanding and that allow them to practice new skills. They become involved in more open-ended inquiry, problem solving, and decision making. In this phase, students may design and carry out their own investigations.

Evaluation: In this phase, students are asked to be metacognitive as they assess their own knowledge, skills, and abilities. Formal and informal evaluation should occur in every phase and level of inquiry. (Lederman, 2010)

Blurb about how learning cycle phase, science and engineering practices and dimensions of science integrate.

Learning Cycle Phase Science and engineering practices Dimensions of Science

Metacognition explanation

15

16

Core Practices for Ambitious Science Teaching

Models and Modeling

Discourse

Public Representations

Content Reading

Content Writing

Scaffolding (expressive and interpretive language)

17

Organizing and Planning for Instruction

18

Assessment

Assessing in Different WaysAssessment is a common practice in today’s classrooms. It usually takes place in predictable ways in

traditional formats. A wide variety of assessment options are available, however, to meet the

instructional needs of teachers and the learning needs of students.

Formative Assessment

Although tests and exams are not going to disappear from schools, student learning can be greatly

enhanced when information from a wide variety of kinds of assessment is used to inform instruction,

provide feedback, and evaluate products and performances. The kind of assessment that occurs before

and during a unit of study is called formative assessment.

Several strategies of formative assessment give students and teachers the kinds of information they

need to improve learning:

1. Strategies for gauging student needs, such as examining student work, analyzing graphic organizers, brainstorming, etc.

2. Strategies to encourage self-direction, such as self-assessment, peer feedback, cooperative grouping, etc.

3. Strategies for monitoring progress, such as informal observations, anecdotal notes, learning logs, etc.

4. Strategies to check for understanding, such as journals, interviews, informal questioning, etc.

Summative Assessment While formative assessments can give students and teachers information about how well they are doing while they are working on projects, at some point, most teachers are required to give a report on student learning at the end of a particular unit or on a particular project. Students also want and need to know how well they have done. This kind of assessment, done after the fact, is called summative assessment.

Summative assessments, like unit tests, can provide useful information if teachers and students take the time to look at them analytically. Teachers can find areas of weakness to address in more depth in future units and with future groups of students. Students can identify problem areas and set goals for future learning.

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/education/k12/assessing-projects/overview-and-benefits/types.html

19

Strands of Proficiency in Science

The committee that authored Taking Science to School described four strands of proficiency that provide

a framework for thinking about the elements of scientific knowledge and practice. The four strands

encompass the knowledge and reasoning skills that students must eventually acquire to be considered

proficient in science. Evidence to date indicates that in the process of achieving proficiency, the four

strands are intertwined so that advances in one strand support and advance those in another.

Used in concert with science standards documents like the Benchmarks for Science Literacy and

the National Science Education Standards, the strands can be useful to educators in their effort to plan

and assess student learning in classrooms and across school systems. They can also be a helpful tool for

assessing the science that is emphasized in a given curriculum guide, textbook, or assessment and for

planning professional development.

Strand 1: Know, use, and interpret scientific explanations of the natural world.This strand includes acquiring facts and the conceptual structures that incorporate those facts and using these ideas productively to understand many phenomena in the natural world. This includes using those ideas to construct and refine explanations, arguments, or models of particular phenomena.

Strand 2: Generate and evaluate scientific evidence and explanations.This strand encompasses the knowledge and skills needed to build and refine models based on evidence. This includes designing and analyzing empirical investigations and using empirical evidence to construct and defend arguments.

Strand 3: Understand the nature and development of scientific knowledge.This strand focuses on students’ understanding of science as a way of knowing. Scientific knowledge is a particular kind of knowledge with its own sources, justifications, and uncertainties. Students who understand scientific knowledge recognize that predictions or explanations can be revised on the basis of seeing new evidence or developing a new model.

Strand 4: Participate productively in scientific practices and discourse.This strand includes students’ understanding of the norms of participating in science as well as their motivation and attitudes toward science. Students who see science as valuable and interesting tend to be good learners and participants in science. They believe that steady effort in understanding science pays off – not that some people understand science and other people never will. To engage productively in science, however, students need to understand how to participate in scientific debates, adopt a critical stance, and be willing to ask questions.

20

Resources:

Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8Committee on Science Learning, Kindergarten through Eighth Grade, Richard A. Duschl, Heidi A. Schweingruber, and Andrew W. Shouse, Editors ISBN: 0-309-66069-6, 404 pages, 7 x 10, (2007)http://www.instesre.org/NSFWorkshop/TakingScienceToSchool.pdf

Ready, Set, Science!: Putting Research to Work in K-8 Science ClassroomsSarah Michaels, Andrew W. Shouse, Heidi A. Schweingruber, National Research CouncilISBN: 0-309-10615-X, 220 pages, 8 1/4 x 10, (2007)http://scnces.ncdpi.wikispaces.net/file/view/Ready%20Set%20Science.pdf/256702030/Ready%20Set%20Science.pdf

Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and PursuitsPhilip Bell, Bruce Lewenstein, Andrew W. Shouse, and Michael A. Feder, Editors, Committee on Learning Science in Informal Environments, National Research Council ISBN 978-0-309-11955-9http://www.washingtonstem.org/STEM/media/Media/Resources/Learning-Science-in-Informal-Environments-People-Places-and-Pursuits.pdf?ext=.pdf

A Framework for K-12 Science Educationhttp://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=13165&page=R1

Nature of Science as described by AAAS/Project 2062http://www.project2061.org/publications/bsl/online/index.php?chapter=1

10 Resources for Effective Elementary Science Educationhttp://teachscience4all.wordpress.com/2010/07/15/10-resources-for-effective-elementary-science-instruction/

21

22

Glossary

Word Definition

REFERENCES

1. Layton, D. (1973). Science for the People: The Origins of the School Science Curriculum in England.

London, England: Allen & Unwin.

2. DeBoer, G.E. (1991). A History of Ideas in Science Education: Implications for Practice. New York:

Teachers College Press.

3. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., and Scott, P. (1996). Young People’s Images of Science. Buckingham,

England: Open University Press.

4. Schwab, J.J. (1962). The Teaching of Science as Enquiry. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

5. Florman, S.C. (1976). The Existential Pleasures of Engineering. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

6. Petroski, H. (1996). Engineering by Design: How Engineers Get from Thought to Thing. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

Methodology

Herron, M.D. 1971. The nature of science inquiry. School Review, 79, 171-212.

Lederman, J.S. (2009). Levels of Inquiry. Monterey, CA: National Geographic School Publishing.

Methods

Lederman, J.S. (2009). Levels of Inquiry and the 5 E’s Learning Cycle Model. Monterey, CA: National

Geographic School Publishing.

Windschitl, M. (2007). Beyond the Scientific Method: Model-Based Inquiry as a New Paradigm of

Preference for School Science Investigations. Published online in Wiley InterScience

(www.interscience.wiley.com).

23

Methods Appendix

What are the Crosscutting Concepts? These concepts help students connect knowledge from the various disciplines into a coherent and scientifically based view of the world. These concepts should become common and familiar themes across the scientific disciplines and grade levels. Explicit reference to the concepts, as well as their emergence in multiple disciplinary contexts, can help students develop a cumulative, coherent, and usable understanding of science and engineering.

This set of crosscutting concepts begins with two concepts that are fundamental to the nature of science: that observed patterns can be explained and that science investigates cause-and-effect relationships by seeking the mechanisms that underlie them. The next concept—scale, proportion, and quantity—concerns the sizes of things and the mathematical relationships among disparate elements. The next four concepts—systems and system models, energy and matter flows, structure and function, and stability and change—are interrelated in that the first is illuminated by the other three. Each concept also stands alone as one that occurs in virtually all areas of science and is an important consideration for engineered systems as well.

SEVEN CROSSCUTTING CONCEPTS OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

1. Patterns. Observed patterns of forms and events guide organization and classification, and

they prompt questions about relationships and the factors that influence them.

2. Cause and effect: Mechanism and explanation. Events have causes, sometimes simple,

sometimes multifaceted. A major activity of science is investigating and explaining causal

relationships and the mechanisms by which they are mediated. Such mechanisms can then

be tested across given contexts and used to predict and explain events in new contexts.

3. Scale, proportion, and quantity. In considering phenomena, it is critical to recognize what is

relevant at different measures of size, time, and energy and to recognize how changes in

scale, proportion, or quantity affect a system’s structure or performance.

4. Systems and system models. Defining the system under study—specifying its boundaries

and making explicit a model of that system—provides tools for understanding and testing

ideas that are applicable throughout science and engineering.

5. Energy and matter: Flows, cycles, and conservation. Tracking fluxes of energy and matter

into, out of, and within systems helps one understand the systems’ possibilities and

limitations.

6. Structure and function. The way in which an object or living thing is shaped and its

substructure determine many of its properties and functions.

7. Stability and change. For natural and built systems alike, conditions of stability and

24

determinants of rates of change or evolution of a system are critical elements of study.

(National Research Council, 2012)

Scientific and Engineering Practices From its inception, one of the principal goals of science education has been to cultivate students’ scientific habits of mind, develop their capability to engage in scientific inquiry, and teach them how to reason in a scientific context [1, 2]. There has always been a tension, however, between the emphasis that should be placed on developing knowledge of the content of science and the emphasis placed on scientific practices. A narrow focus on content alone has the unfortunate consequence of leaving students with naive conceptions of the nature of scientific inquiry [3] and the impression that science is simply a body of isolated facts [4].

Engaging in the practices of science helps students understand how scientific knowledge develops; such direct involvement gives them an appreciation of the wide range of approaches that are used to investigate, model, and explain the world. Engaging in the practices of engineering likewise helps students understand the work of engineers, as well as the links between engineering and science. Participation in these practices also helps students form an understanding of the crosscutting concepts and disciplinary ideas of science and engineering; moreover, it makes students’ knowledge more meaningful and embeds it more deeply into their worldview.

The actual doing of science or engineering can also pique students’ curiosity, capture their interest, and motivate their continued study; the insights thus gained help them recognize that the work of scientists and engineers is a creative endeavor [5, 6]—one that has deeply affected the world they live in. Students may then recognize that science and engineering can contribute to meeting many of the major challenges that confront society today, such as generating sufficient energy, preventing and treating disease, maintaining supplies of fresh water and food, and addressing climate change. Any education that focuses predominantly on the detailed products of scientific labor—the facts of science—without developing an understanding of how those facts were established or that ignores the many important applications of science in the world misrepresents science and marginalizes the importance of engineering.

PRACTICES FOR K-12 SCIENCE CLASSROOMS

1. Asking questions - Science begins with a question about a phenomenon, such as “Why is the sky blue?” or “What causes cancer?,” and seeks to develop theories that can provide explanatory answers to such questions. A basic practice of the scientist is formulating empirically answerable questions about phenomena, establishing what is already known, and determining what questions have yet to be satisfactorily answered.

2. Developing and using models - Involves the construction and use of a wide variety of

25

models and simulations to help develop explanations about natural phenomena. Models make it possible to go beyond observables and imagine a world not yet seen. Models enable predictions of the form “if … then … therefore” to be made in order to test hypothetical explanations.

3. Planning and carrying out investigations - Investigations may be conducted in the field or the laboratory. A major practice of scientists is planning and carrying out a systematic investigation, which requires the identification of what is to be recorded and, if applicable, what are to be treated as the dependent and independent variables (control of variables). Observations and data collected from such work are used to test existing theories and explanations or to revise and develop new ones.

4. Analyzing and interpreting data - Science produces data that must be analyzed in order to derive meaning. Because data usually do not speak for themselves, scientists use a range of tools—including tabulation, graphical interpretation, visualization, and statistical analysis—to identify the significant features and patterns in the data. Sources of error are identified and the degree of certainty calculated. Modern technology makes the collection of large data sets much easier, thus providing many secondary sources for analysis.

5. Using mathematics and computational thinking - Mathematics and computation are fundamental tools for representing physical variables and their relationships. They are used for a range of tasks, such as constructing simulations, statistically analyzing data, and recognizing, expressing, and applying quantitative relationships. Mathematical and computational approaches enable predictions of the behavior of physical systems, along with the testing of such predictions. Moreover, statistical techniques are invaluable for assessing the significance of patterns or correlations.

6. Constructing explanations - The construction of theories that can provide explanatory accounts of features of the world. A theory becomes accepted when it has been shown to be superior to other explanations in the breadth of phenomena it accounts for and in its explanatory coherence and parsimony. Scientific explanations are explicit applications of theory to a specific situation or phenomenon, perhaps with the intermediary of a theory-based model for the system under study. The goal for students is to construct logically coherent explanations of phenomena that incorporate their current understanding of science, or a model that represents it, and are consistent with the available evidence.

7. Engaging in argument from evidence - Reasoning and argument are essential for identifying the strengths and weaknesses of a line of reasoning and for finding the best explanation for a natural phenomenon. Scientists must defend their explanations, formulate evidence based on a solid foundation of data, examine their own understanding in light of the evidence and comments offered by others, and collaborate with peers in searching for the best explanation for the phenomenon being investigated.

8. Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information - Science cannot advance if scientists are unable to communicate their findings clearly and persuasively or to learn

26

about the findings of others. A major practice of science is thus the communication of ideas and the results of inquiry—orally, in writing, with the use of tables, diagrams, graphs, and equations, and by engaging in extended discussions with scientific peers. Science requires the ability to derive meaning from scientific texts (such as papers, the Internet, symposia, and lectures), to evaluate the scientific validity of the information thus acquired, and to integrate that information.

27