No description available.

This mixed-method study surveyed first year high-performing science students who participated in high-level courses such as International Baccalaureate (IB), Advanced Placement (AP), and honors science courses in high school to determine their perception of preparation for academic success at the collegiate level. The study used 52 students from an honors college campus and surveyed the students and their professors. The students reported that they felt better prepared for academic success at the collegiate level by taking these courses in high school (p<.001). There was a significant negative correlation between perception of preparation and student GPA with honors science courses (n=55 and Pearson’s r=-0.336), while AP courses (n=47 and Pearson’s r=0.0016) and IB courses (n=17 and Pearson’s r=-0.2716) demonstrated no correlation between perception of preparation and GPA. Students reported various themes that helped or hindered their perception of academic success once at the collegiate level. Those themes that reportedly helped students were preparedness, different types of learning, and teacher qualities. Students reported in a post-hoc experience that more lab time, rigorous coursework, better teachers, and better study techniques helped prepare them for academic success at the collegiate level. Students further reported on qualities of teachers and teaching that helped foster their academic abilities at the collegiate level, including teacher knowledge, caring, teaching style, and expectations. Some reasons for taking high-level science courses in high school include boosting GPA, college credit, challenge, and getting into better colleges. / Includes bibliography. / Dissertation (Ph.D.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2016. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection

Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries

The development of single-variable causal reasoning is well-studied, with children demonstrating an impressive ability to detect causality from an early age. A less studied, and perhaps important, ability is to understand multivariable causality. Individuals who possess a single-variable mental model of causality risk not thinking deeply enough to accurately detect and understand how the world works. Previous work with middle-schoolers (Kuhn, Ramsey and Arvidsson, under review) has shown that students can be supported in developing their mental models of causality through an extended opportunity to deeply engage in self-directed investigations. These investigations used social studies and health content within social studies and science classrooms; the current work evaluates whether similar development can be supported through using science curriculum content. To evaluate the question, an intervention was conducted in which students performed self-directed investigations into databases to uncover relationships in the data. These investigations were carried out by utilizing InspireData, an age-appropriate software that allows students to visually represent data. Ninety-two eighth grade students were assessed after a self-directed investigation of factors affecting precipitation levels in which they used InspireData to interpret data. Approximately 58% of students had previous experience with a self-directed investigation into factors affecting Body Mass Index, also using InspireData. Students either participated in a one-day intervention (the dense condition) or a six sessions within a two-week period (distributed condition). The effectiveness of the intervention was measured through three assessments: 1) The eighth grade research report prepared during the intervention; 2) A graph-reading assessment which used novel InspireData graphs; and 3) The Cancer Task, which provided an assessment of each student's mental model of causality. Intervention students had superior understanding of causality when compared to an out-of-school control group for mental model of causality, but the improvement in scientific reasoning skills was not as dramatic as in previous interventions. Intervention students demonstrated an ability to detect causal relationships during their intervention, as well as on unfamiliar graphs. There were no differences in graph interpretation and research report performance by condition (dense or distribution conditions) or previous experience. These results suggest that the understanding of multivariable causality is a fragile construct which will not always develop under what appear to be similar circumstances. Students in this intervention investigated a database, successfully identifying relationships present in the data, but were not as likely to undergo the cognitive change necessary to improve their multivariable thinking as participants in previous interventions. Beliefs about the nature of science may affect how students participated in the intervention and therefore whether conceptual development regarding causal understanding was possible. Suggestions for further research into the circumstances in which multivariable understanding can develop and implications based on these findings are discussed.

As maker spaces, engineering design curricula, and other hands-on active learning tasks become more popular in science classrooms, it is important to consider what students are intended to take away from these tasks. Many teachers use engineering design tasks as a means of teaching students more general science principles. However, few studies have explored exactly how the design of these activities can support more generalized student learning and transfer. Specifically, research has yet to sufficiently investigate the effects of task design components on the learning and transfer processes that can occur during these kinds of tasks. This dissertation explores how various task manipulations and focusing processes affect how well students can learn and transfers science concepts from an engineering design task. I hypothesized that learning goals that focus students on the deep structure of the problem, and contrasting cases that help students notice that deep structure, would aid learning and transfer. In two experimental studies, students were given an engineering design task. The first study was a 2x2 between subjects design where goal where goal (outcome or learning) and reflection (on contrasting cases or the engineering design process) were manipulated. A subsequent second study then gave all students contrasting cases to reflect on, and only the goal manipulation was manipulated. Results showed that learning goals improved student performance on a transfer task that required students to apply the deep structure to a different engineering design task. In the second study, learning goals improved student performance on a transfer test. Transfer performance in both studies was predicted by the ability to notice the deep structure during the reflection on contrasting cases, even though noticing this structure did not differ by goal condition. Students with a learning goal valued the learning resources they were given more during the engineering design activity, and this perceived value of resources was linked to greater learning. A qualitative case study analysis was then conducted using video data from the second study. This case study investigated noticing processes during the building process, partner dialogue, and resource use. This analysis showed how high transfer pairs were better able to focus on the deep structure of the problem. Results suggest that what students noticed didn’t differ much between the various pairs. However, high transfer pairs were better able to focus on the deep structure through establishing a joint understanding of the deep structure, sustaining concentration on that deep structure during the cases reflection, referencing resources to identify features to test, and then systematically testing those features to identify their relevance. These processes are discussed in relation to how they differ in low transfer pairs. This dissertation consists of four chapters: an intro, two standalone journal articles, and a conclusion. The first chapter provides a conceptual framing for the two journal articles, and discusses the findings from these articles in conversation. The second chapter describes the two empirical studies investigating how task goals and contrasting cases affect learning, and transfer from an engineering design task. The third chapter describes the comparative case study of how mechanisms of focusing on the deep structure differ between high and low transfer pairs. Finally, the fourth conclusion chapter discusses the implications of the work from both of these papers.

Educational research has established a positive influence of learning the nature of science (NOS) on teachers’ practice when an explicit reflective approach to instruction is employed (Abd-El-Khalick, 2001; Abd-El-Khalick & Akerson, 2004; Akerson, Abd-El-Khalick, & Lederman, 2000; Duschl & Grandy, 2013; Lederman, 2007; Pintrich, Marx, & Boyle, 1993; Schwartz & Crawford, 2004). Additionally, research focused on the utility of teaching teachers neuroscience has indicated a positive connection between learning neuroscience in professional development settings and effective classroom practice (Dubinsky, Roehrig, & Varma, 2013; Roehrig, Michlin, Schmitt, MacNabb, & Dubinsky, 2012). Therefore, this study hypothesizes that there is an important connection between neuroscience and teachers’ conceptions of NOS, in that neuroscience can be used as a tool to better understand the complex NOS, and that this understanding has connections to classroom practice. This study presents an approach for NOS instruction that utilizes a situated approach for teaching NOS in addition to using “catalytic groups” to push forward the discussions about the potential connections that could be made between neuroscience and NOS. The goal of this study was to explore the potential relationship between neuroscience and NOS as a method for better understanding the complex NOS and define that relationship more clearly. Additionally, the study was designed to measure the effectiveness of the alternative design approach for situated NOS instruction. This novel design approach consisted of the use of ‘catalytic groups’, or small groups that met outside of class time, whose conversations guided the conceptual changes for students in the larger class setting. A mixed-methods analysis was utilized to investigate how the 17 participants in this study interacted over the course of the four weeks, how their understandings of NOS and their attitudes and beliefs toward integrating neuroscience and NOS change over time into one cohesive understanding of NOS. Additionally, a case study was conducted that provided deeper insight into participant interactions during the four-week course. Evidence collected in this study included Likert surveys, open-ended reflection reports, observations, a researcher journal, and transcriptions of catalytic group settings. Using a theoretical framework of conceptual change, a number of findings were realized from the evidence collected. These findings are presented in the form of a manuscript approach to the dissertation, where each Results chapter is presented as a single, separate research paper that is appropriate for formal publication. These two separate manuscripts use conceptual change as the theoretical framework for data analysis. Chapter 4 presents the mixed-methods analysis of all 17 participants in the study and Chapter 5 presents a mixed-methods, case study approach of three participants. Based on the evidence in Chapter 4, three major findings were realized: (1) previous exposure to NOS may help students to apply the abstract tenets of NOS to a scientific context, (2) the use of neuroscience as a situated approach for NOS instruction was particularly effective for areas of neuroscience most closely related to teachers’ practice, and (3) added time for critical reflection and small-group discourse impacted the perceived importance of NOS on daily classroom practice. The three findings provide evidence for a meaningful re-design of the novel instructional approach used in this study for further implementation in NOS instruction, with an emphasis on utilizing small-group discussion settings for students to reflect on their changing understandings of NOS in relation to teacher pedagogy. Based on the evidence in Chapter 5, three main findings are reported: (1) the degree of appropriateness of neuroscience for contextualized NOS instruction may be varied based on students’ perceived intelligibility of neuroscience, (2) when context-specific NOS instruction is utilized, it is imperative that students connect the specific context used for instruction to their own scientific knowledge and experiences, and (3) when students are learning NOS, those learning opportunities must have perceived value and relevance to the professional development of students. The findings from this study provide evidence of the usefulness of integrating neuroscience and NOS in the quest to better understand how students comprehend the nature of the scientific discipline. In this study, neuroscience was particularly useful because of its character as a ‘contemporary science story’, where the tenets of NOS are explicit and easy to see. Areas of future research are also explored, with suggestions on the use of neuroscience to teach the complex NOS. Three common themes describe the findings from each of the Results chapters that comprise this study. First, neuroscience can prove as a useful scientific context for NOS instruction even when students are not necessarily familiar with neuroscience content. However, this usefulness depends on students’ ability to connect neuroscience to classroom practice and/or to their own science disciplinary focus. Second, critical reflection proved to be an important aspect of NOS instruction, as it allowed students to reflect on their own understandings of NOS with a focus on how those understandings have changed over time. Last, the catalytic groups that define the alternative model for NOS instruction that was used in this study positively impacted NOS learning. These groups impacted students’ ability to synthesize neuroscience with NOS into a cohesive understanding of NOS at a general level. These findings leave a variety of implications for future NOS instruction in addition to suggestions for the future use of the instructional approach presented in this study. Those implications include the use of more catalytic groups for NOS instruction, where all students are engaged in small-group discussions that inform future NOS instruction, and more targeted metacognitive strategies for NOS instruction, where specific strategies are employed to allow all learners to develop a ‘deep processing’ orientation toward NOS.

Many school districts do not require science in the elementary school curriculum or place significantly more emphasis on the performance of students on the ELA and Math tests. With science education shifting to the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), there is a critical need for high quality science instruction in elementary schools. This study examines the experiences of 28 elementary teachers engaged in a science education professional development program that was comprised of 60 kindergarten through twelve grade teachers. I examine the experiences of the 28 elementary teachers as they work in vertically aligned professional learning communities with middle and high school teachers. Findings in this study indicate that the model provides a supportive environment for elementary teachers to grow and develop both personally and professionally in their science teaching practice. Evidence is presented that shows how a learning community of elementary, middle and high school teachers can provide an opportunity for elementary teachers to socially construct knowledge of how to best support student success in science. Additionally, the findings show that elementary teachers are able to socially construct knowledge about effective teaching practices in science that support core science teaching practices. The findings also indicate that the nature of these learning communities also provided many structures that can support increased efficacy amongst elementary science teachers. Finally, the experiences of elementary teachers engaged in his study were overwhelmingly positive, leading to increased trust and respect amongst peers and improved confidence and motivation to teach science at the elementary level.

Building on the success in a previous study in engaging the underserved middle-school population in the practice of science through individualized scaffolding, the current study sought to examine an automated-agent, Astro-world, developed to provide real-time guidance to students in order to increase the scalability of the intervention while maintaining the benefits of the individualized format. Through practices of argument and counterargument in advancing and challenging claims, the agent focused on coordination of multiple variables affecting an outcome, rather than only the foundational and more extensively studied strategy of controlled experimentation, in the context of a scenario in which students had to investigate multiple factors affecting the performance of potential astronauts in a space simulator. The intervention sought to help students see the purpose and value of scientific practices using social science content rather than traditional science topics. In addition to adapting the technology into a regular classroom setting in which the teacher is actively engaged (teacher-involved condition), the study included a second condition to determine if the technology could be used effectively without active teacher involvement (tech-only condition). Delayed far-transfer assessments showed that only students in the teacher-involved condition (but not the tech-only condition) outperformed those in a non-participating control group in recognizing the need for evidence and considering all contributing factors in making predictions. Furthermore, post-hoc analysis showed that these significant differences occurred predominantly among those who mastered the foundational control of variable skills. Possibilities are considered as to why teacher involvement was critical to effectiveness, and implications for classroom practice are addressed.

Achieving science education goals by teaching a breadth of science is possible, but it requires verbal pedagogies which require trust. However, the lack of trust in teachers is an international problem, leading to suboptimal school performance and other issues. Research concerning the importance of trust in science education is found wanting. To determine which trust factors affected achievement of which science education goals, 96 female yeshiva students in grades 7, 8, 9, and 12 filled out a survey and questionnaire that asked about their perceptions of the effects of their trust-in-teachers factors on their achievement of science education goals. Regardless of subgroup (tier [group of school grades] or learning style), the following science education goals were statistically significantly perceived by participants to be achieved with the presence of the listed trust factors: • Learning Classroom Science: Role, Transferring Knowledge, and Character. • Science Literacy: Transferring Knowledge. • Future Science: Role and Transferring Knowledge. For the following subgroups, the listed trust factors were also valued: Students who learn best by “listening to [their] teacher”: Expertise and Support; students who learn best by “exploring and doing things with [their] physical hands”: Emotional Relationship and Guidance; middle schoolers: Meritorious Service and Emotional Relationship; high schoolers: Guidance. It was also found that age has less predictive power than learning styles or “school blocs” (elementary school, middle school, high school) which are socially-constructed and ignore learning styles. Because of verbal methods’ more ubiquitous application than strictly science-educate-minded pedagogies, if repeated with modification, the Shade Report instrument introduced in this study has implications for students of different demographics (including ethnicities/cultures, sex, school type, and grade), additional learning styles, different science education goals, control factors or intimacy factors rather than trust factors, and teachers if they indicate how students can be more effective students. The present study has provided information regarding which trust factors are perceived by students to achieve specific science education goals. The next possible research step is to more fully examine through appropriate research design how to achieve each of the required trust factors.

Novice science teachers struggle to incorporate reform-based perspectives of teaching and learning into their planning and instruction. Some argue that this is due to a mismatch between teachers’ beliefs and the goals of reform. However, it is widely recognized that the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and science teaching is tenuous at best. Previous attempts to understand the mismatch between preservice teachers’ espoused beliefs and their classroom practices draw upon models of teacher cognition that consider beliefs and knowledge as the main drivers of their actions. In this study I use a goal-driven model of science teacher cognition as my theoretical framework. This model posits that classroom practices are an attempt to achieve particular goals. Based on this model, I conducted a cross-case analysis using qualitative methods to examine the relationship between teachers’ beliefs, knowledge, and goals and the types of learning opportunities they design. Data were collected through participant interviews and document analysis. Findings are consistent with the theoretical premises of this model, suggesting that the goals teachers pursue are influenced by their beliefs about teaching and learning science, together with the contextual characteristics of their placement. Findings suggest that the design and enactment of high cognitive demand learning tasks is facilitated by several factors. First, preservice teachers need to operationalize their beliefs into learning goals for their students, including explicit epistemic goals that seek to engage students in the use of science practices to make sense of disciplinary ideas. Second, in order to achieve their goals, preservice science teachers need to learn how to design scaffolds that bridge students’ classroom practices with the practices of the discipline to make sense of scientific ideas. Finally, the goals of the teacher education program, the school, and the personal goals that preservice teachers aim to pursue may conflict; whether and how they solve these conflicts influence the cognitive demand of the tasks they design. This study suggests that helping student teachers develop and pursuing goals that characterize high cognitive demand tasks have the potential to improve their teaching practices.